What does your macro photography setup look like?
What does your macro photography setup look like?I’m not a dedicated, precise macro guy. I’m a keep-it-as-simple-as-possible-occasionally-shoots-a-very-tight-close-up guy.The outfit works with any lens, zoom or prime. I use only zooms and most often use my incredibly sharp 18–105 f/4, but the big f/4 weights more than the body and the little pancake is light and for just walking around is perfect.Key is my Polaroid-brand monopod, a 7-footer with a shooter’s Vee-yoke instead of a photo head of any kind. It steadies the camera but also allows much flexibility of movement for composition and focusing. Seven feet allows me to place the camera just about anywhere. I can use it as a walking staff if I don’t throw my full weight on it. I pretty much never go out without it.I like to do a little closeup (maybe not “real” macro) but I’m super lazy and also want to be as unencumbered as possible (30-odd years of schlepping massive cases loaded with tons of gear will do that to ya). The little pair Neewer automatic extension tubes above cost less than $30 USD, weigh next to nothing and take up virtually no room in the bag. In fact, you can stick one in a pocket as they are not optical; they are just spacers that let you get closer with any lens at all.I am using an APS-C so I am not averse to letting my ISO “float” to higher levels, even 6400+, and dealing the noise in “post.” I shoot 100% raw which gives complete flexibility in finishing, but I will never tell anyone they gotta do what I do; ya do what works.IF YOU ARE TRIGGERED BY SPIDERS STOP HERE!IF YOU ARE TRIGGERED BY SPIDERS STOP HERE!IF YOU ARE TRIGGERED BY SPIDERS STOP HERE!Spiders at sunrise in the dew-soaked tallgrass prairie. Yum!In addition to allowing my ISO to float up to pretty high levels (usually but not always “capped” around 6400) I am also not averse to cropping. The larger “half-frame” sensor plus raw capture gives a whole lot of wiggle room. I’m out to make nice pitchers and have fun but I no longer have to worry about selling it.
Mirrorless Camera vs DSLR?
Crap advice so far. Still too many so called photographers that don't know what they are talking about. Any photographer that would take a so called "bridge camera' over an EVIL or ILC is high. Bridge cameras are trash, just cheap compacts in a bigger body. Mirrorless cameras have their place, and in time will most likely out sell entry level dSLRs like the Canon Rebel once people figure out that some of these cameras actually take better photos than the dSLR. Why would the causal photographer want to lug around a Canon T3i or T4i and a big zoom lens on vacation? I get paid to use my dSLR, and honestly, on my days off, I'm not really into carrying it around. So the Olympus is fine, but understand a few things first. The Oly is a micro four thirds, that sensor is significantly smaller than what you find in a dSLR. The upside is that the lenses, especially the zoom can be a little smaller. If you go to something with a smaller sensor, like a Nikon J1, the lenses could potentially be smaller again. The downside is that the image quality will lag in low light at high ISO. In good light, then the image quality is on par with any entry level dSLR and kit lens. The Sony NEX system beats everyone else hands down for image quality, that's a fact. On the downside, using a dSLR sized image sensor means big lenses, it's a law of physics thing, so be aware of that. The Sony NEX can go toe to toe with any Canon dSLR and beat it for image quality in low light at high ISO. So in some cases the dSLR loses. But that doesn't mean it's the best camera. If I'm shooting a football game, I want a dSLR. If you need compact, but still want lots of zoom, you can forget about compact cameras like this. If you can deal with shorter or even fixed focal lengths, then a Sony NEX or Oly will be fine. For the NEX to keep things compact, the new 16-50 pancake zoom is nice, and for low light, the new 35mm f/1.8 is nice too. If you don't fancy a chunky dSLR then by all means get a large sensor compact with a compact-ish lens, fire away, and ignore the haters. These guys remind me of the chumps in 2002 that would say things like "film till I die" now look at them, all using that evil dSLR.
What is the difference between a stock air filter and a K&N air filter?
Air filters are there to prevent dust and other particles to be sucked into the engine. The trade-off is the air flow. Fine filters stop smaller particles but restrict the airflow more, so less air is sucked into the engine and therefore less is available for combustion. Freer flowing filters let more and bigger particles in, sacrificing engine longevity.OEM filters are typically made of dense paper media and trap the smallest particles. They restrict the air flow, but it’s the part of the design and other components are adjusted to compensate (jets, ignition timing, compression ratio, etc.).K&N and foam filters are made of coarse media that allows freer air flow, but also lets bigger dust particles in.Aftermarket air filters are used to allow more air into the engine, so more gas can be mixed with it. The goal is to produce more power, but to achieve that other parts of the system need to be modified accordingly (the engine that suddenly got more air to breathe with the same amount of gas will run to lean a mixture which would defy the purpose).For those that fall for the “more air flow, better filtering” marketing, I suggest looking through a K&N filter against bright light.K&N Air Filter Review - Debunking the Myths (and why OEM is better)Filtration Testing for Amsoil, K&N, Napa, Jackson Racing, Baldwin, and Mazda air filters on a Miata
What is the best DSLR camera for a beginner to buy (in India) and why?
It’ll depend on your budget. If you’re looking for something under 30k, go for Nikon D5200. I’d avoid nikon’s D3300 because I found the colour reproduction of the camera is nowhere near to D5200’s. If you’re willing to spend a few bucks more, you have more options.You can buy D5300, which is an excellent camera to start with.Or you can buy D5200 with kit lens, plus an additional 35mm 1.8G or a 50mm f1.8G lens with it. I’d have done this. Trust me you’ll not regret buying that prime lens. You’ll thank me later.If you’re willing to spend around 50k, then why stick to a entry level camera? We all know that most of the entry level cameras are more or less same. (Understand that only the features you’ll use should be deciding factor, not all the features company is providing.) I think Nikon D7000 is a decent semi professional camera (Though it is an older release, and many features are backdated, but still it does a pretty good job and it should be the choice if you’re serious about photography)Note: I haven’t mentioned any canon models, because i feel when it comes to entry level cameras, nikon offer better things than canon within the same budget. Story is a bit different and complicated when it comes to high end full frame bodies though.Hope this helps. Goodluck! :)