*Warning: A bit dry if you are not interested in lens shopping*
This is the most professional lens I own. It was gifted to me as an early birthday present from the Boy. We were in Macau, staying at Galaxy Macau. Here is the post of the trip: Galaxy Macau, House of Dancing Water, and Ice World Venetian.
That night as we were getting ready to go to sleep, I found a nicely wrapped present which contained an even more beautiful lens.
When I was an intern with Elisa B Photography, I was able to use her 105mm and instantly fell in love. It is an amazing macro lens and just has the most phenomenal detail and bokeh (the blurriness of the surrounding). It is crisp, sharp and enlarges the tiniest objects and animals. It also works very well as a telephoto lens and can get really great shots from a long ways away. However, it is around $800 and up, and so out of my price range.
Which is why I was so thrilled to have been gifted it! And it was everything I remembered and more.
Working for Elisa, I used this lens with an FX camera (full frame which is basically the digital version of a film camera). I have a DX (smaller) and I haven't noticed anything really different with how the lens handles. Here is Ken Rockwell's review of the lens, if you are interested.
Here are some shots that I have done. If you are using it as a macro, I would recommend a tripod unless the animal you are photographing doesn't really move and you have a very still hand/very great lighting. One of Ken Rockwell's complaints is that while you are focusing the shot, the image size changes which is called breathing. I noticed this a little but it wasn't a big issue for me. Here are some shots that I took with it, using it as a macro:
 |
| Those are not my fingers, I had the boy pose with the ring so you can see the star ruby clearly |
 |
| I love how extreme the blurriness can be. This was me just messing around. |
 |
| 105mm used as a telephoto |
 |
| Monkey fight with the 105mm |
 |
| Closer to the 55mm end of the 55mm-200mm |
 |
| 200mm end of the 55-200mm |
If you have the money, get this lens. I am extremely happy with it. Be warned though, it is heavy.
Ah, Cici . . . you keep writing compelling articles about expensive gadgets and wallet will suffer and my wife will divorce me. It is amazing that such clear photos can come out of such a range without distortion at the edges.
ReplyDeleteAnd by the way--I absolutely love the way you anonomize (I think I made that word up) "The Boy." It took me quite a while to figure out, but after reading this one, I have a handle on "The Boy."
I have a good friend studying Buddhist Philosophy at Sarah College for Higher Tibetan Studies and its mother school the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics in Dharamsala, Himachel Pradesh. He hasn't blogged in a while, but you can find him here: http://www.dharamsalalight.blogspot.com/
I am glad that I have a fellow traveler who delights in expensive gadgets. Honestly speaking, it might be worth your wallet suffering (maybe not divorce; it's good but it's not THAT good. I would hold out on having the 24-70mm for that) to have this lens.
ReplyDeleteWhat's funny is that a few people have had some confusion about "The Boy" and I think it might be a generational thing. That isn't to say that we have a huge discrepancy in age (The Boy and I are seven years apart), it just seems to be something about the very early twenties. Also, I like your word and will spread it as widely as I can.
Funny enough, I was actually where your friend is for a couple of months and will be back in February.
I love a good macro lens! That 105mm looks sweet, but $$. For those (like me) who want macro on a budget, I'd look at the 60mm f/2.8 Nikkor Micro AF-D. You need a D70, D90 or D7000 to focus (no on-lens AF-S motor), but they can be had in good condition used for under $400. And they are built like little tanks. Not much telephoto, but still a good portrait or general-use lens.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post ci-ci, I didn't find it dry at all. at least I can live vicariously through you while I'm a student, and can't (shouldn't) spend money on such things. as for the word "anonomize" I've heard it all the time, good word. glad you posted this I'll keep it in mind for later.
ReplyDeletePhotomiser, I actually looked at the 60mm as well while I was dreaming about macros and read that it was very good but you need to get closer to the subject. Getting closer might mean blocking your light and/or scaring off whatever it is you are photographing. Does it work well for you? I get most of my information from Ken Rockwell, so I don't have the greatest variety of sources!
ReplyDeleteAnanda, glad you like it! Hahaha, to be fair, I only got this as a gift... Ahhhh, good to know, in any case I will use it more =)