Can Macro filter work as tele-zoom?

[blacksheep]

I should probably get a new one. I also thought a ball-head nicer than 3-axis that I have now - a 3 axis head is good for panorama shots [ 2 or 3 shots together ] sticking shots together is called stitching or for following a guy running straight or side ways .
A ball head is good for following a bird that goes up / down both have their own uses .
Macro to most of use means a prime lens [ 28 , 35 , 50 , 100 mm ] generally a 1 to 1 relationship .
A zoom is a variable lens like a 10-22 , 17-55 , 70-200 .
When a zoom lens says macro [ 28-135 macro , 70-300 macro ] it just means it focuses a little closer .
Tripods - YOU can steady one by hanging weight from center column . Tight fitting rubber bands , O-rings put next to joints can help .
There are 2 lines of thought about using them . One is a leg between your 2 legs ant the other is the third leg pointed at what you are shooting .
I always put the camera strap over my neck when using a tripod . I also have a quick release plate so camera come off tripod when I move . Don't leave camera and tripod by them selves .
MC on a filter means multi coated . The coatings are for scratch resistance , flare , ghosting , easier cleaning - probably 5 or 6 other things so company can say we are better

I am not sure what you mean by "Tight fitting rubber bands, O-rings put next to joints can help."...I've tried to google "O-rings" too, but not really getting to what you probably mean here.

I also do not like leaving a camera alone with the tripod - I only do it in a place where there is no one else, and no wind - safe environment and I am shooting myself without a help

More clear explanation about a difference in macro, prime, zoom lenses. Thank you!

[blacksheep]

Hi Urban,

I think that the use of extension cubes are a bit too advanced to me now First I thought "oh it maybe a nice option when I decide to go for a prime lens" but more I read your post the more I feel a bit too early for my level now. BUT interesting what you wrote. Thank you!

When I bought D90, I was doubting with D5100 which had a vari-angle monitor. Eventually I decided not to go for it, and I think I made a right choice. Sometimes I use a mirror to look at the LCD monitor when impossible position

You made my eye open for using self-timer for avoiding the shake. Never thought about that. Smart!

[Manfred M]

1. The reason you do not see the "F" mount mentioned is that it is usually implied. Nikon introduced this mount in 1959, so getting a non-F mount lens is usually not an issue. The things to think about though are the newer features; autofocus and anti-shake technology (VR). Most of Nikon's current catalogue is autofocus, but the f/1.2 50mm is still manual focus. This is more of an issue if you are looking at used lenses. The VR is not offered on all lenses, and has less impact on shorter focal length ones (wide angle lenses) and should be turned off when shooting with a tripod.

2. The camera's sensor output is "cleanest" at the base ISO. The sensor has amplification circuits built in and as you increase the ISO settings, you get more amplification and being an analogue process, it amplifies the signal and "noise". If you read about signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, this is what they are talking about. This noise comes from a number of sources, including the sensor itself, the amplifier circuitry, etc. and increases as you increase the gain. This was the same in the film days; low ISO meant fine grained images and high ISO meant coarse grained images (which actually looked good in sports and action photography). That being said, 400 ISO is usually fairly "clean", so I am a bit surprised the this is an issue.

3. In any situation where you can't get the image quality you want, introducing extra light is a very good approach. Your camera has a pop up flash, so you do have (limited) flash capability built in. The next step up is to use a system flash (I have one SB600 and one SB900) and virtually never use them without a light modifier (a diffuser), bounce light or off-camera (with a stand and umbrella). For off camera, I'm pretty sure that your camera's flash can be used to trigger a slave flash. Add a reflector and you have a "cheap" studio setup.

4. I bought the f/4-5.6 55-200mm primarily for architectural and landscape photography and did use is for some wildlife and portraiture work as well. It has the advantage of being very light-weight and very compact, so I will take it along when I go out for walks or go hiking. The reason I went to the f/2.8 was primarily for portraiture work. I was taking a studio lighting course and found that I needed a lens with a very shallow depth of field, especially for portraiture work. I was planning to upgrade to a full-frame camera, so the investment was viewed as something I did for the long term. I bought that lens almost 2 years before I went full-frame. It really is overkill for a DX camera, as one only uses the centre part of the lens, but it is an excellent lens

I use any lens for landscape work; from ultra-wide angle to a telephoto. The prime lens (I have three; four if you count the 8mm DX fisheye) I use for special purposes. The f/1.8 35mm and the f/1.8 50mm I use very much as walk-around lenses for street photography. They make the photographer look less threatening because they are so small. The 35mm I use on the D90 and the 50 on the D800. My other prime is the f/2 105mm DC, which I primarily use as a portrait lens. I don't see any particular advantage (or disadvantage) in using a zoom for landscape photography.

5. "Regular" could mean pretty well anything. Unless it specifically says CPol, I would assume they mean linear polarizer, which is not suitable for most DSLRs. If it says CPol, then uncoated would be my first guess.

6. I bought the Käsemann for work in the tropics. I also has regular polarizers there and they performed very well. I guess I did not spend enough time in the tropics to get into trouble.

[blacksheep]

1. The reason you do not see the "F" mount mentioned is that it is usually implied. Nikon introduced this mount in 1959, so getting a non-F mount lens is usually not an issue. The things to think about though are the newer features; autofocus and anti-shake technology (VR). Most of Nikon's current catalogue is autofocus, but the f/1.2 50mm is still manual focus. This is more of an issue if you are looking at used lenses. The VR is not offered on all lenses, and has less impact on shorter focal length ones (wide angle lenses) and should be turned off when shooting with a tripod.

2. The camera's sensor output is "cleanest" at the base ISO. The sensor has amplification circuits built in and as you increase the ISO settings, you get more amplification and being an analogue process, it amplifies the signal and "noise". If you read about signal-to-noise (S/N) ratio, this is what they are talking about. This noise comes from a number of sources, including the sensor itself, the amplifier circuitry, etc. and increases as you increase the gain. This was the same in the film days; low ISO meant fine grained images and high ISO meant coarse grained images (which actually looked good in sports and action photography). That being said, 400 ISO is usually fairly "clean", so I am a bit surprised the this is an issue.

3. In any situation where you can't get the image quality you want, introducing extra light is a very good approach. Your camera has a pop up flash, so you do have (limited) flash capability built in. The next step up is to use a system flash (I have one SB600 and one SB900) and virtually never use them without a light modifier (a diffuser), bounce light or off-camera (with a stand and umbrella). For off camera, I'm pretty sure that your camera's flash can be used to trigger a slave flash. Add a reflector and you have a "cheap" studio setup.

4. I bought the f/4-5.6 55-200mm primarily for architectural and landscape photography and did use is for some wildlife and portraiture work as well. It has the advantage of being very light-weight and very compact, so I will take it along when I go out for walks or go hiking. The reason I went to the f/2.8 was primarily for portraiture work. I was taking a studio lighting course and found that I needed a lens with a very shallow depth of field, especially for portraiture work. I was planning to upgrade to a full-frame camera, so the investment was viewed as something I did for the long term. I bought that lens almost 2 years before I went full-frame. It really is overkill for a DX camera, as one only uses the centre part of the lens, but it is an excellent lens

I use any lens for landscape work; from ultra-wide angle to a telephoto. The prime lens (I have three; four if you count the 8mm DX fisheye) I use for special purposes. The f/1.8 35mm and the f/1.8 50mm I use very much as walk-around lenses for street photography. They make the photographer look less threatening because they are so small. The 35mm I use on the D90 and the 50 on the D800. My other prime is the f/2 105mm DC, which I primarily use as a portrait lens. I don't see any particular advantage (or disadvantage) in using a zoom for landscape photography.

5. "Regular" could mean pretty well anything. Unless it specifically says CPol, I would assume they mean linear polarizer, which is not suitable for most DSLRs. If it says CPol, then uncoated would be my first guess.

6. I bought the Käsemann for work in the tropics. I also has regular polarizers there and they performed very well. I guess I did not spend enough time in the tropics to get into trouble.

1. I still do not get how “F-mount” is implied in the lens from other brands than Nikkor, but I noticed that they do mention like “Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 DG MACRO Nikon” so this way I can already see which lens fits with NIKON
I am having a really hard time deciding whether to go for a prime lens or zoom lens now…

2. This is what I photographed with ISO400. You can see the sky is grainy..

I also noticed that D90 cannot save an image as TIFF. I just learnt yesterday that TIFF is better than JPEG.

4. I started thinking my current lens 18-105mm is good enough for the landscape photography for now. It was more like a problem for street photography where I want to zoom in more into a person without being noticed. So here I think I would buy a polarizing filter that fits with my current lens (which I plan to keep using for landscape photography), and get a new lens only for the other purpose. I understood that my budget is not enough to get all the equipment to achieve all my requirements for now, so I decide the priority at this point. I guess my biggest frustrations now are the image quality and the shutter speed in low light. (Zoom-in on street photography comes next, but this will be for leter…) For this, I think I would get a prime lens – just not sure whether how much mm I should buy. My budget is around 200 euro, so I am thinking of buying one from the following:

Nikkor AF 50mm f/1.8 D (€ 129,00)
Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G (€ 169,00)
Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.8 G (€ 189,00)
(All from http://www.cameranu.nl/en/objectieve...sort=price-asc)

I noticed that there is D and G at the end of aperture value, but what do they indicate?

I don’t know anything about “full frame”, so I did not understand your reply about this part completely. I went to the manual of D90, and it seems this camera is not “full frame” as the size of the image is not 35mm format. It says 23.6 x 15.8 mm. Am I correct?

5. I figured “Regular” one was not multi-coated. You mentioned that MC has several layers of thin film coatings to reduce reflections. Does this mean it reduces the reflections more than the single coated Polarizing filter? Is that why it is better?

[Inkanyezi]

1. I still do not get how “F-mount” is ...

F-mount is Nikon's old mount from 1959, which mechanically is still used, so any such lens will fit mechanically on any Nikon SLR camera. However there are quirks to them, so all will not fit all cameras optically or electrically, and some of them have mechanical features that make them less compatible.

2. This is what I photographed with ISO400. You can see the sky is grainy..

"Grain" per se, is not a feature of digital photography, but there is noise in all electrical signals, and some of this noise causes random patterns in the images. The "ISO" setting is in fact not the only factor to take into account, but the noise level is a function of exposure. At very low levels of exposure, noise becomes more visible, as the light forming the image does not cause much more impression than the noise. At higher levels, with more exposure, there is less noise visible. Hence, when you do not need a high dynamic range, you may capture the image with a high ISO setting without getting much noise, while when you need wider dynamic range, you have to expose more, with a lower ISO setting. Dynamic range is widest at the lowest ISO setting.

I also noticed that D90 cannot save an image as TIFF. I just learnt yesterday that TIFF is better than JPEG.

Tiff is a format that maintains all image data upon saving, what's called a non-destructive format. However it is not the native format of any camera, but cameras produce RAW files, that may be converted to images. The RAW file does not contain any information of colour or where in the matrix of the sensor any particular data comes from, except as a linear feature; it registers the digital values of all light wells linearly as a file.

The conversion program sorts it out with the help of a table that tells it where the image data belongs and what colour each data post is. It also blends colours and values, so that an image can be drawn on the computer screen or print. Nikon's native RAW format has the file extension .NEF

So your RAW files will not be called TIFF, but NEF.

Some cameras do have .TIF as extension, but those are not Tiff files, but they carry an embedded Tiff together with their RAW data. The reason for this is that the manufacturer wanted the Windows operating system to recognize the file as an image and to show the Tiff image as a thumbnail. The RAW data in the file still is RAW data. So there is no camera that actually saves a Tiff file, but they save RAW and the image format jpeg, or in the case of a rare few pro digital backs, a RAW file with the extension .TIF that also has an embedded small Tiff image.

/.../
I noticed that there is D and G at the end of aperture value, but what do they indicate?

There are several helpful pages on the web about those letters. You can try: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/nikortek.htm
The letter D indicates that the lens covers only the D-size sensor that your camera has.
The letter G tells us that the lens does not have a mechanical diaphragm ring, but will only operate the diaphragm by the camera's mechanism. Lenses with the G are unsuitable for macro work with extension tubes, unless those tubes also carry the mechanical output from the little lever in the body to the lens. They cannot be used reversed, unless you have one of those "macro kits" that has a special ring for stopping down Nikon lenses.

I don’t know anything about “full frame”, so I did not understand your reply about this part completely. I went to the manual of D90, and it seems this camera is not “full frame” as the size of the image is not 35mm format. It says 23.6 x 15.8 mm. Am I correct?

You are correct. Your camera is a "DX" camera, while Nikon full frame cameras are called "FX".

5. I figured “Regular” one was not multi-coated. You mentioned that MC has several layers of thin film coatings to reduce reflections. Does this mean it reduces the reflections more than the single coated Polarizing filter? Is that why it is better?

Multi-coating comes with different monikers from various manufacturers. Fuji calls their multicoating EBC, and there are also other obscure names for it, but the name itself says little about how well it works. It is a jungle out there, and I guess there are still manufacturers around that don't treat their filters as well as they should. Hoya HMC coating is very good, but I cannot really judge any other brand. But presently at least all lenses manufactured for digital cameras have excellent antireflex coating. About the filters; different matter.

Polarisers mostly are not coated. Maybe the process cannot be applied to laminated filters. All polarisers are made of resin material, and filters for lenses mostly are laminated with glass on at least one side, sometimes both, to protect the soft resin material.

[tonyjr]

Inkanyezi - very go answers ---
I don't like Hoya's . Every new release is easier to clean than last - 3 years ago I gave up on them . The big reason I use UV filters is that a filter is easier to change and clean later than it is to clean a lens now .
I do have hoyas , - they are used as spares or loaners .
B + W is the brand I use . I do have the cheap filters - they are on the lenses on shelf - yes I have lens caps on lenses also

[Manfred M]

Time for another crack at this as well...

1. I still do not get how “F-mount” is ...

If you buy a new lens from Nikon, it will be an "F-mount" lens. You just need to be sure that this is stated when you look at third party manufacturers. You just have to make sure that the lens has been adapted for use by a Nikon camera.

2. This is what I photographed with ISO400. You can see the sky is grainy..

Unfortunately, I can't see the image. As is stated in other answers, you are not seeing grain, but noise. What I find strange is that you are showing noise at a low ISO (400). The native ISO on the D90 is 200, so there is something very strange going on there.

I also noticed that D90 cannot save an image as TIFF. I just learnt yesterday that TIFF is better than JPEG.

TIFF has some advantages over jpg and some disadvantages, but it also has disadvantages. TIFF stands for Tagged Information Format File, and no, the D90 does not write this format. You have to create TIFF files using an external program. It is generally viewed as a lossless format (there are actually "lossy" TIFF formatst too) that can preserve layer information. My D800 can natively output TIFF files. The main downside of TIFF is that the files are very large and there are many places where they cannot be used.

The D90 natively outputs either jpg or 12-bit NEF files. If you want to do a lot of image editing, NEF is the way to go as you have preserved all of the data that the camera is capable of recording in that format. If you are just going to show your friends or post to the internet, jpgs could be the way to go.

I don’t know anything about “full frame”, so I did not understand your reply about this part completely. I went to the manual of D90, and it seems this camera is not “full frame” as the size of the image is not 35mm format. It says 23.6 x 15.8 mm. Am I correct?

The D90 is a crop frame camera (also known as an APS-C size), and full frame refers to something that is around the same size as 35mm film, i.e. 24mm x 36mm. This means that the focal lengths you are used to (if you come from a 35mm film camera) will be different. APS-C has a 1.5 crop factor. This means a 50mm lens on your camera will give you the same effect as a 75mm lens on a full-frame or 35mm film camera. If you want to use a "normal" lens on your camera, the 35mm lens will be closest and will give the same effect as a 52.5mm lens on a full frame camera. In other words, if you want shots to look like you were using a 50mm lens in a film camera, buy the 35mm lens for your camera.

I figured “Regular” one was not multi-coated. You mentioned that MC has several layers of thin film coatings to reduce reflections. Does this mean it reduces the reflections more than the single coated Polarizing filter? Is that why it is better?

Polarizing filters are alway made from plastic. The have very thin lines inscribed in the resin to provide the polarizing effect, and this simply cannot be achieved in glass. Because plastic is much more sensitive to scratches than glass, polarizers are often sandwiched between glass plates. Reflection occurs wherever two materials that have significantly different indicies of refraction (like air and glass); coatings can be applied to glass surfaces. This can be done on a polarizer and does improve performance. If it is coated or multi-coated, it will cost more and will be included in the description of the filter and price.

[blacksheep]

Thanks all!
I think I understood more about F-mount and Polarizer. Now the remaining questions… 
1. I did not know “grain” and “noise” are different. I photographed that image with F4.2, 1.6 sec at ISO400. I think I did what Urban wrote – “expose more, with a lower ISO setting”.
Manfred, what did you mean by “native ISO”? I am trying to upload the image here still..
2. I knew I could save the image as RAW file, but I decided not to do it as I keep post-processing to minimum without using a photoshop or GIMP. RAW takes too much space too, and I don’t find it necessary to start saving the images in this format now. Maybe in the future….
However I do want to have images printable in a big size without losing a quality, not only to show it to my friends on internet. I would like to make a portfolio in the future.
3. I am still not sure if I understand, but I read it in the manual – it says the lens type G does not come with a aperture ring whereas the lens type D does. I think my current lens 18-105mm is a type G, but I do not know what the aperture ring is. Is it something I need?
4. I briefly read about “APS-C” on Wikipedia now, and understood that my camera has a smaller sensor than the full frame (35mm) camera, and it has less quality (more noise) when enlarging images. It also crops the images by 1.5 but this does not mean it’s magnifying the object, but simply a smaller field of view. Now, I am a bit confused when you (they) write “50mm lens” “75mm lens” or “300mm” lens – for example can my lens 18-105mm also be understood as “50mm lens” or “75mm lens” because it can zoom into that value?
It’s a bit general question but I am really confused now. Is t about fixed-focal lens (prime lens)?

I understood that your suggestion of 35mm lens would give me a closer result in an image as what you see in your eye, but can 35mm lens (I am assuming this as a prime lens 35mm here) be suitable for portrait too?

[blacksheep]

Sorry. I was blind not to see how.
So here it is:

[Inkanyezi]

The 35 mm suggestion is what is a "normal" lens for your camera, "normal" denoting that its focal length is close to the diagonal of the sensor. It is only a matter of photographer's lingo, so we all know that "normal" lens would mean a certain angle of view, with the actual focal length depending on the size of the frame in the camera. Medium format cameras will have larger "normal" focal length and smaller format cameras will have a shorter "normal" lens.

Lenses that are considerably shorter than the "normal" are said to be "wide angle" lenses, and if substantially longer, they are "tele" lenses. Your zoom covers all those ranges.

Your sensor is a very good sensor with a large dynamic range, which means that it can register a wide span of subject tones, from very bright to rather dark, at the same time. As I said earlier, the noise level depends on exposure, and parts of an image that are close to black, will show some noise when you scrutinise them. This is not a defect, it's just how physics of electronic image recording works. You shouldn't bother about that noise, because you will push it far into the dark when you make prints or show it on a monitor. It is only when you go closely into those dark parts of an image and enlarge them, that you will notice the noise. In fact, the D90 has less noise than most cameras when all other factors are equal.

The 35 mm lens, the "normal" for your camera, is not particularly suited for close portraits, although it works well for half figure, as you can take it from a reasonable distance. When you want to take just a head shot, you'll get rather close with the "normal" lens, which causes some features to look distorted, the nose too large, or if shooting the face at an angle, one ear that is bigger and the nose maybe pointing away. This is not an effect of the lens per se, it is the perspective you get at the close distance. It can be even more exaggerated if you use a wide angle lens.

So for portraits, photographers tend to use slighly longer lenses, with a focal length of between 1½ to 2 times longer than the "normal". Hence a 50 mm lens will do the job well, and some prefer a 70 mm lens for portraits. Although your zoom does have all these focal lengths, it might sometimes be less suitable for portraits, due to two properties. It has a rather small aperture, and it might have a not quite pleasing rendering of the unsharp background. Photographers often want the background to have a particular softness that can be achieved with some lenses, and also we often prefer the background to be lost in blur entirely. This is achieved by a large aperture, as for example a 50 mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 lens.

[blacksheep]

Thank you for your post Urban. I understand why the prime lens of 50mm f1.8 is so popular..

From what I read from your comment, I feel very much that 50mm lens is better, however, according to Manfred, 35mm would also give a same effect as a 52.8mm lens on a full frame camera.

I will try to find a shop which I can see how it looks/feels to use 35mm lens and 50mm lens.
I understood that 35mm gives a best result with my camera now, but I think I will need to decide whether I chose the quality or to achieve the images I want to photograph with less quality now. It's a difficult decision.

[blacksheep]

In the meantime, I am trying to buy one of the below polarizing filter. Can somebody tell me which is better?

Circular Polarizing Filter Hoya 67mm HD
Circular Polarizing Filter B + W 67mm MRC

[Manfred M]

It really depends on the type of shooting you are planning to do. I use the 35mm lens on my normal "walk around" lens on the crop-frame D90. I use the 50mm lens on the full-frame D800 as a walk-around lens. Both lenses are compact and make the camer look a lot less imposing that a huge zoom lens.

I have used the 50mm lens on the D90 for some portraiture, but find it is a bit short for my shooting style. I tend to use 70 to 90mm on the D90 and the 105 - 135mm range on the D800. I perfer a closer crop on a fast lens.

I don't tend to like using the 50mm on the D90, it's just a focal length I tend not to use very often

As for the filters, I have found the B+W line fairly consistent and good. Hoya filters I've had some issue with in the past, so I've tended to stay away from them. You might want to read the following link:

http://www.lenstip.com/115.4-article...d_summary.html

[blacksheep]

Hello Manfred,

I still have not found a shop that let me try how it looks when using 35mm and 50mm prime lens on my camera.
I have decided to use the new lens for portrait mainly, and keep on using the current lens (18-105mm) for landscape for now. So the lens that needs the polarizing filter is set now, and I wanted to know the difference in HD and MRC.
I read the specification, but I still do not understand which one suits for what purpose...

[krispix]

Hi Blacksheep,
Just a note of caution. Very old F-Mount lens (pre-1977) will not fit your camera. Although they will appear to, they will damage your camera if you try. There's not many of these old work-horses around any more, but to be safe make sure you only look at lenses with autofocus. That way you'll know they'll fit OK

[blacksheep]

Chris, thank you for warning!

[Manfred M]

Hello Manfred,

I still have not found a shop that let me try how it looks when using 35mm and 50mm prime lens on my camera.
I have decided to use the new lens for portrait mainly, and keep on using the current lens (18-105mm) for landscape for now. So the lens that needs the polarizing filter is set now, and I wanted to know the difference in HD and MRC.
I read the specification, but I still do not understand which one suits for what purpose...

With your 18-105, set the zoom to 35mm and the zoom to 50mm, that way you will be able to see the difference in how things will look to you with both lenses. You don't need to get to a shop to see the differences here. The main difference you will notice is that the prime will give you the ability to shoot with a much narrower depth of field, but that's difficult to judge just looking through a lens.

HD vs MRC - you are down to splitting hair there I think. MRC refers to B+W's multi-coating process (might be anti-scratch and anti-reflective), so you'll have to read the literature to see what it is supposed to do HD seems to indicate that it will give you superior results using a digital sensor. Frankly, I suspect that much of this is marketing speak and wouldn't get too worried. I have high-end (B+W and Heliopan) and lower end (Tiffen) polarizers and in my work have not found an amazing difference in my results.

[blacksheep]

Thanks for explaining about Polarizer... seems not too important.
About lens, Manfred you are right.. I don't know why I wanted to go to shops anymore. I think I wanted to see the images in result how different they are.

I found an interesting comparison on Youtube. Now I feel like wanting 85mm...but I won't be able to afford it ;;;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu1NqZoTYBw

[tonyjr]

I prefer B +W . They are easier to clean .
I use UV filters mainly because they are easier to change and clean later than to clean a lens on the spot .
A hoya is good for at most a 2 1/2 stop Nd where the B +W can give you 3 .
But this is like arguing about cars - just make sure you don't get a slim and get a rubber hood . The rubber hood makes it easier to adjust the CPL with out touching glass .

[blacksheep]

Thanks Roy!
I would not be too much bothered by those brands any more. It's good to know that a slim is not good. I thought it was an advantage.