"John H." wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 20:31:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:18:33 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Last year I bought a macro tube for my Oly and never used it for one
reason or another. Being bored today, I went out and took some shots
with it.

All the images are as shot - the only "edit" was a conversion to .jpg
so it could be viewed by others. All were shot in ORF (raw). If
anybody wants the RAW files to play around with, let me know and I'll
up load the RAW file for download.

This is what happens when you don't pay attention to the meter, ISO,
shutter speed and what ever else. It would have been a good one.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...5_edited-1.jpg

This was just an experiment to get used to the macro tube.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...7_edited-1.jpg

I was quite surprized at the detail you can get.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...8_edited-1.jpg

This is one of those "baffling" images with some interesting side
effects from the ice that I didn't anticipate. It's a very different
image.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...9_edited-1.jpg

There is a considerable amount of noise in this image which I can't
explain - it should not have happened given how I set it up.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...4_edited-1.jpg

This is the same image (taken as a bracket) and not retouched. Go
figure.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...5_edited-1.jpg

Just messing around.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...6_edited-1.jpg

I have to get used to a whole different approach to depth of field
with the macro tube. This is a good image, the idea was good, but the
execution leaves a lot to be desired.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/...3_edited-1.jpg

Serendipity - I really like this image - anybody guess why?

Of course, you like cherries.


Reggie, today I took the Nikon 18-200 VR back to the store. They're
going
to send it to Nikon to get checked out. They also think there may be
something wrong with the autofocusing. I'll let you know what they say.
--
John H


It's a zoom lens. That's what's wrong with it. Cut loose with some more
cash
and buy 2-3 lenses suited to their proper purposes, you piker.


This damn thing cost enough to focus properly!

Piker my ass!
--
John H


All zoom lenses are a compromise. That doesn't excuse defects, but still, a
compromise.