As for the other shot, it wasn’t a fisheye, but close. That little toy camera has a fixed 33mm lens, which on a crop-body digital like your D90 (or the crop-body digital I ordered an hour ago) is the same as 22mm. It isn’t quite a fisheye, but it’s a very wide angle, so you start to see some of the same distortions.
Those are some nice black and whites- the elephant looks ready to run right out of my monitor. What are you using to convert those?
Lightroom sounds ideal for what you do. Its full name is Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, so it’s from the same family, but it ditches the layers and some of the localized adjustments in favor of more photography-oriented editing. Curves, color channels, exposure adjustments, and some spot corrections are all still there, and it allows you to organize your photos into a library by keywords and other tags. If you’ve ever used Picasa or iPhoto, it’s like one of those on steroids. There’s a free trial on the Adobe site, but be careful- that’s how I got hooked. It’s professional software, and it can definitely help you get professional results.
RAW has the potential for higher quality results, but keep in mind that straight from the camera it will often look worse than JPEG because it hasn’t been processed. The real difference is that you get complete control- the camera doesn’t apply any sharpening or corrections. Just don’t be alarmed if your RAWs are a little dull at first- it’s how they work.
As for macro lenses, I am not the most educated, but I know the 105mm Nikkor micro is the gold standard on the F-mount. Unfortunately, it’s about $900 US. There is a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro that sells for around $400 US new that is supposedly as good optically but a little slower and noisier when focusing, and a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro that is highly praised as well for about $450 US new. Macro lenses aren’t cheap, but these are all top shelf lenses, and will be useful as fast telephotos for portrait or general use. There’s a 60mm Nikon micro for about $520 US, but I think the Sigma or Tamron would be a better choice. The longer focal length keeps you a little farther from your subjects at the same magnification.
If price is your main priority (as it usually is for me), something like a used manual focus 55mm f/2.8 AIS from a 100% reputable used gear dealer goes for only a little over $100 US. Unfortunately, you won’t have metering on the D90, so you’d have to guess and use trial and error to dial in the right exposure. This wouldn’t be the end of the world (if you’re shooting things that aren’t going to run or fly or crawl away), and if you like it, you can always spend more on an AF micro/macro lens down the road. The older manual focus lenses hold their value fairly well because people like me like manual focus (and buy cameras that will meter with old lenses even if they’re outdated and get crushed in image quality by modern cameras like the D90. Oh yeah, and D200s cost about half as much- remember how I said price is usually my priority?).
Macro is fun, and I’ve been thinking of trying it out for a while. This reminds me that one of those $120 manual focus micros is near the top of my wish list as well . . .
You have some of the most beautiful photography, here. And I see that you are friends with Anthony and Chloé! They helped me decide what camera that I should invest in for photography.
Thank you for the many compliments on my blog! I haven’t finished a post in over two weeks. Actually, the truth is that I thought that my blog was going no where and that no one was enjoying it. So, you can see how thrilled I was to recieve great feedback from you! No, I am actually not a professional in the Fashion industry…yet! I am studing to become one. Fashion, to me, is like photography to you. I absolutely love it. It constantly keeps me entertained, even just looking at clothing on the runways.
Thanks for commenting and saving my blog! I am looking forward to seeing more photography from you!!
“blue moon” reminds me of the movie grease & i don’t know why haha(!)
that’s an intense photograph
<3
(intense, being really really really f**king cool)
I really like the tones in this one.
As for the other shot, it wasn’t a fisheye, but close. That little toy camera has a fixed 33mm lens, which on a crop-body digital like your D90 (or the crop-body digital I ordered an hour ago) is the same as 22mm. It isn’t quite a fisheye, but it’s a very wide angle, so you start to see some of the same distortions.
Those are some nice black and whites- the elephant looks ready to run right out of my monitor. What are you using to convert those?
Lightroom sounds ideal for what you do. Its full name is Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, so it’s from the same family, but it ditches the layers and some of the localized adjustments in favor of more photography-oriented editing. Curves, color channels, exposure adjustments, and some spot corrections are all still there, and it allows you to organize your photos into a library by keywords and other tags. If you’ve ever used Picasa or iPhoto, it’s like one of those on steroids. There’s a free trial on the Adobe site, but be careful- that’s how I got hooked. It’s professional software, and it can definitely help you get professional results.
RAW has the potential for higher quality results, but keep in mind that straight from the camera it will often look worse than JPEG because it hasn’t been processed. The real difference is that you get complete control- the camera doesn’t apply any sharpening or corrections. Just don’t be alarmed if your RAWs are a little dull at first- it’s how they work.
As for macro lenses, I am not the most educated, but I know the 105mm Nikkor micro is the gold standard on the F-mount. Unfortunately, it’s about $900 US. There is a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro that sells for around $400 US new that is supposedly as good optically but a little slower and noisier when focusing, and a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro that is highly praised as well for about $450 US new. Macro lenses aren’t cheap, but these are all top shelf lenses, and will be useful as fast telephotos for portrait or general use. There’s a 60mm Nikon micro for about $520 US, but I think the Sigma or Tamron would be a better choice. The longer focal length keeps you a little farther from your subjects at the same magnification.
If price is your main priority (as it usually is for me), something like a used manual focus 55mm f/2.8 AIS from a 100% reputable used gear dealer goes for only a little over $100 US. Unfortunately, you won’t have metering on the D90, so you’d have to guess and use trial and error to dial in the right exposure. This wouldn’t be the end of the world (if you’re shooting things that aren’t going to run or fly or crawl away), and if you like it, you can always spend more on an AF micro/macro lens down the road. The older manual focus lenses hold their value fairly well because people like me like manual focus (and buy cameras that will meter with old lenses even if they’re outdated and get crushed in image quality by modern cameras like the D90. Oh yeah, and D200s cost about half as much- remember how I said price is usually my priority?).
Macro is fun, and I’ve been thinking of trying it out for a while. This reminds me that one of those $120 manual focus micros is near the top of my wish list as well . . .
You have some of the most beautiful photography, here. And I see that you are friends with Anthony and Chloé! They helped me decide what camera that I should invest in for photography.
Thank you for the many compliments on my blog! I haven’t finished a post in over two weeks. Actually, the truth is that I thought that my blog was going no where and that no one was enjoying it. So, you can see how thrilled I was to recieve great feedback from you! No, I am actually not a professional in the Fashion industry…yet! I am studing to become one. Fashion, to me, is like photography to you. I absolutely love it. It constantly keeps me entertained, even just looking at clothing on the runways.
Thanks for commenting and saving my blog! I am looking forward to seeing more photography from you!!