Any photographers out there!?

[Life]

The super range lenses are always very poor quality. You end up with tons of distortion, image quality that's on par with a kit lens at best, and it's incredibly slow and expensive. The only real benefit is not having to change lenses as often. If it's really worth it for that, then go for it, but don't expect to be getting a big upgrade from the 18-55 in terms of image quality.


OP: The t3i is a mighty fine camera. I suggest picking up a 50mm f/1.8 as your next lens, if you like shallow depth of field. You could even take it a step further and get a samyang 85 f/1.4 which would give you incredibly thin dof, but it is a manual lens. Overall image quality is quite impressive for the cost though.


If you want to get started with macro, my reccommedation is to pickup an enlarging lens and a set of macro bellows. Look for schneider or rodenstock lenses, 50-75mm is probably best for an aps camera. This method will give you excellent image quality, and the whole setup should only cost about $100.

So my wife just ordered this camera for me. I read some reviews on it and I dont really know what to think. Good or bad? I know the camera is good but is all the accessories that came with it good?

Amazon.com: Canon EOS Rebel T3i 18 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II Zoom Lens & EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens + 11pc Bundle 16GB Deluxe Accessory Kit: Camera & Photo

To the OP, YES there are other photographers out there! (me)


@Foothead. What the heck are you talking about??? We are talking about Digital, and clearly not living in the Film days anymore.

WHAT... nonononono. For someone "interested" in macro photography, and just trying it out, Buy macro Filters. I bought a set for $15. The macro is absolutely amazing, it can be a little difficult to focus, but big whoop. why waist a $100 on something that you might not like. For a $100 a lens must be pretty crappy, and I know what you are going to say. the more you stack the filters, the worse quality it will get. NO, WRONG, The quality is like a $300 macro lens. I'll add a few pictures to show the difference between my Macro lens, ($200) (Which I already returned) and the filters ($15)

($15)

($200 lens that I returned)

You can see they are all relatively nice, Obviously the quality and how close you get is better with the filters. A good macro lens isn't a bad idea, but when you are just starting, then do yourself a big favor and don't waist money on a macro lens. Just buy filters like these: Amazon.com: PLR Optics 58MM +1 +2 +4 +10 Close-Up Macro Filter Set with Pouch For The Canon Digital EOS Rebel SL1 (100D), T5i (700D), T4i (650D), T3 (1100D), T3i (600D), T1i (500D), T2i (550D), XSI (450D), XS (1000D), XTI (400D), XT (350D), 1D C, 70D

 

[foothead]

To the OP, YES there are other photographers out there! (me)


@Foothead. What the heck are you talking about??? We are talking about Digital, and clearly not living in the Film days anymore.

WHAT... nonononono. For someone "interested" in macro photography, and just trying it out, Buy macro Filters. I bought a set for $15. The macro is absolutely amazing, it can be a little difficult to focus, but big whoop. why waist a $100 on something that you might not like. For a $100 a lens must be pretty crappy, and I know what you are going to say. the more you stack the filters, the worse quality it will get. NO, WRONG, The quality is like a $300 macro lens. I'll add a few pictures to show the difference between my Macro lens, ($200) (Which I already returned) and the filters ($15)

($15)

($200 lens that I returned)

You can see they are all relatively nice, Obviously the quality and how close you get is better with the filters. A good macro lens isn't a bad idea, but when you are just starting, then do yourself a big favor and don't waist money on a macro lens. Just buy filters like these: Amazon.com: PLR Optics 58MM +1 +2 +4 +10 Close-Up Macro Filter Set with Pouch For The Canon Digital EOS Rebel SL1 (100D), T5i (700D), T4i (650D), T3 (1100D), T3i (600D), T1i (500D), T2i (550D), XSI (450D), XS (1000D), XTI (400D), XT (350D), 1D C, 70D

Perhaps you should actually find some photos that are in focus if you're trying to assert the quality of a lens. All three of those examples seem to be missing focus to the front a bit and/or having DOF issues. The area that is in focus is relatively sharp for a $15 magnifying lens set though, so I'll give you that. An enlarging lens would still give superior results while being a much more convenient setup to use. I went straight to this suggestion because the OP asked for "a nice macro lens." But yes, those would be quite good for someone unsure of if they like macro, or just playing around. Extension tubes are still a better solution if you can get aperture control on your lens though. Don't do this if you can't. DOF control is VERY important with macro.


Also, your "a $100 lens must be pretty crappy" line is totally without basis. We're talking about enlarging lenses here. These things used the same optical designs as schneider/rodenstock's professional view camera lenses, just optimized for close focus. The reason they're readily available for cheap now is because darkrooms are going the way of the dodo, and not very many people have caught onto the fact that these can easily be repurposed. If you look in this thread, you can see a couple 100% crops from a componon S on a D800E (36MP) to give an idea of the sharpness. Make sure you click and view full size. Edit: lab tests for componon s 50mm. The site also has lab tests for a bunch of other lenses. This one does very well, but isn't quite up there with modern macro lenses at high magnifications. You'd be getting into $500-1000+ kit to go 4:1 anyway, so I think this is more than acceptable given the extremely low cost.


Also, that superzoom lens is optically mediocre, same as pretty much any other superzoom. Don't believe me? Check lab tests here. My point before was about priorities. If what you care about is never having to change lenses, then go for it by all means. Just understand that you're getting kit lens quality at best. This is normally the total opposite reasoning for someone buying a DSLR, so it needed to be pointed out.

 

[sniperviper21]

I concor.

For a photo to be considered in focus, more then 40% of the photo needs to be in focus.

My tablet could take decent macro shots too -lol-