 |
| Fruit and bacon. |
Have you seen this? That's creative. And for a good cause, too.
I did not come anywhere near getting run over this morning, which is good. The other day I almost got cleaned off my bike in a crosswalk by a left turner. He was too busy chatting on the cell phone to pay attention to his surroundings, and the bell on the bike is not loud enough to warn vehicular traffic. He missed the front tire by less than five feet.
Hey, does anybody have any advice on a good-yet-reasonably-priced Canon EF or EF-S macro lens for taking pictures of objects no larger than a handgun, and which would be good for photographing rollmarks or cartridges or small stuff like that?
Actual blogging will resume shortly...
If you have a removable lens you can put a double tube between the camera body and the lens. That turns a standard lens into a microscope. I took a picture of a bird seed and it looked like a 3 ton boulder. You could see the scratches in the seed cover.
ReplyDeleteCheap two. Any camera shop should have one or two of them.
I got hit (mildly) twice in one day in San Francisco by people turning "on red" because they were too busy with other things to pay attention to anything as insignificant as the 5000 pounds of glass, rubber, and steel they were piloting.
ReplyDeleteBut apparently my fist pounding on the hood of a Ford Exploder is loud enough to draw attention. I may have actually left a dent on that one.
I have a recurring fantasy where I catch up to the driver at a red light, knock on their window, and politely inform them that vehicular manslaughter puts hella points on your license. Haven't had the chance to do it in real life, unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteI caught up to an inattentive senior citizen who had nearly smeared me once and informed her of her error. She splutteringly told me I was "a bad man".
ReplyDeleteMaybe you need one of these in addition the the bell:
http://www.amazon.com/Delta-Airzound-Bike-Horn/dp/B000ACAMJC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1370612187&sr=8-1&keywords=bike+air+horn
In a previous life, I had a set of screw on magnifiers the worked like the tube referenced above. They screwed on to the front of the lens where your UV filter, star filter, etc. go. If I remember correctly, they were not that expensive, and I could take photos that made a gnat look like Mothra. At the time I had a Pentax ME-f with a standard 52mm lens.
ReplyDeleteOh the empty headed pilots of so much steel!
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm glad you enjoyed my silliness
Don't know if this has any interest, but here's a link to a kickstarter project for battery-powered loud bicycle horns.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lansey/loud-bicycle-car-horns-for-cyclists
Instead of a whole new lens, look for a set of focus adjusters. They're basically filters, that you set on the front of your current lens, that shorten the focal point, so you can get up close to stuff for photos. MUCH cheaper, and very effective.
ReplyDeleteThis is the set I got: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001ANXRQA/ref=oh_details_o01_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
ReplyDeleteNow if I could just figure out where I stashed them....
If I ate that breakfast I'd die of the shits in 12hrs. IF I didn't go into shock from that much vitamin "C" first.
ReplyDeleteIf we were still in the lovely world of Nikon Fs and Plus-X, I would invite your atention to one of several Nikkor "medical" lenses. (Had one, loved it.)
ReplyDeleteBut we aren't, and since you don't want to spend lavishly, you might want to investigate Paul's suggestion. A $140 semi-solution is here:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=300603&is=REG&Q=&A=details
The lens extender works well, used one when I was studying biology in college, does narrow your focal field, kinda sorta like high mag binoculars, but thats to be expected.
ReplyDeleteAs for idgits in cars when I'm biking, I have left more than my fair share of dents in hoods. When I was younger and more stupid, I actually carried a medium sized crescent wrench that I used to bang on cars that almost hit me. Made them think they had hit me and 9 out of 10 times they would stop and check on me. 1 in 10 would speed up and haul ass to the horizon. Either way, they all became more aware of cyclists and left with a dent or scratch as a reminder.
Twenty years later I look back on that idiot and wonder how I made it this far.
By the way, I can no longer comment on the site using my iPhone. Don't know if that really matters, but thought I would mention.
I sometimes wonder what I would do with myself if I didn't have a spouse, 2 kids, and a demanding full-time+ job.
ReplyDeleteLuckily, I can read Tam's posts to find out. Someday I'll be pedaling to a relaxed breakfast then the range. Someday...
Tam,
ReplyDeletethere is a horn mounted on a can of some type of compressed gas, that is used by small boats. I've seen them mounted on bicycles. I think the mounting unit was sold at bicycle shops, but not sure. Used to see them on the East Coast. Sounded like a big rig horn. Light weight.
Less than 5 feet?
ReplyDeleteHell, around here that's enough room for another addled brain driver to try to fit his car into.
Bike horns - The Delta Airzound, which works and is available now ($25 at Amazon.) The Kickstarter project horn (now at loudbicycle.com) isn't available quite yet, but is designed to sound like a car horn, so it'll get instant respect when it goes off. Theoretically.
ReplyDeleteEither way, you should get something. You're too much fun to read to end up as Tamcakes due to another's vehicular stupidity.
Several options (types of options) for macro-ish photogrpahy. Extenison tubes as mentioned work fine, but for EOS systems with electronically controlled diagphragms I suspect you need tubes with electrical connections and hence not cheap.
ReplyDeleteAlternatively there are the supplementary close-up lenses "like filters" as others have pointed out. The single-element ones tend not to be so great. Double-element achromats are better, but cost goes up quite a bit. Nikon used to make 3T and 4T close-up lenses (52-mm filter size) and also 5T and 6T which were for 62-mm filter threads. Since discontinuation they have shot up in price. (Like almost three figures for the 5T/6T.) Canon made similar, but as a mainly Nikon user I can't recall their designations.
Since it's bucks for something pleasant to use anyway, I'd recommend a real macro lens. When getting one consider working distance (the distance you have between front of lens and subject). A real short working distance makes it hard to light the subject properly. Also note that the working distance in most spec sheets is the distance between the sensor (film in old days) plane and subject, NOT the distance from the end of the lens, which is what practically matters. Personally I'm quite happy with a Tokina 100/2.8 ATX macro on my DX camera (1.5x crop, similar to your Canon 1.6) though the effective focal length gets a little too long for some applications. I also use and like an old Canon FD mount (i.e. not compatible with your EF-S mount) 200/4 macro with great working distance, but probably not useful to you.
The old Canon EF 50/2.5 macro is apparently pretty decent, but there's only about 4" between front and subject, making it and its ilk best for shots of things like stamps and coins. Gets to 1:2 lifesize. The EF-S 60mm macro gets to 1:1 and is supposedly really good, but as an EF-S lens limited to 1.6x crop cameras (which you have, so that's okay). Look at KEH.com for used equipment. They have good prices, good return policy, and are very conservative about condition ratings. Meaning that a "BGN" (bargain) grade lens by their scale is generally better than "Mint" ebay lenses. No connection other than they have too much of my money.
I used to do this for a living -- photography -- and had the EF 50/2.5 as part of my work issued kit. It's a good lens, but the technology dates back to the late 80s, early 90s.
ReplyDeleteI now have the EF-S 60 f/2.8, which is better in almost every way: Sharper, contrastier, focuses faster and quieter, focuses to 1:1, as opposed to 1:2, and is eminently useable as a portrait lens.
The 50 beats it on price, useability on a full frame camera and by being a third of a stop faster -- which won't matter for macro photography, because you'll most likely be stopping down as depth of field is incredibly shallow.
That brings up two other points: You'll need to think about a tripod/some other source of support, and probably some form of lighting.
I got this Macro Reverse Ring adapter for my Canon EOS Rebel T3 and it seems to work decently. For $7.50, it is cheap enough to get as an experiment before spending on my expensive tubes and/or lenses.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001G4PA36/ref=oh_details_o07_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1