Help with lens/shooting pics

[rsl3]

I have a Nikon D3100 with stock lens. I purchased a set of the macro close up lenses and while they do take decent pictures, nothing spectacular. What do you recommend for a good macro lens?

Secondly, what do you recommend for taking pics under blue lighting? When I take photos under blue leds or even 14 k halides. I know it is overly saturated in blue but the images are cloudy as well. Any recommendations for shooting when there is more blue?

 

[_Aaron_]

I have a Nikon D3100 with stock lens. I purchased a set of the macro close up lenses and while they do take decent pictures, nothing spectacular. What do you recommend for a good macro lens?

Secondly, what do you recommend for taking pics under blue lighting? When I take photos under blue leds or even 14 k halides. I know it is overly saturated in blue but the images are cloudy as well. Any recommendations for shooting when there is more blue?

I'm currently using a Sigma 105mm HSM OS, it's excellent... I'll post some samples of you wish? I've also used the Nikon 60mm AF S as well. What's your budget?

With regards to the blue, two options are to set a custom WB on the camera or get some software to remove the blue post processing. I opt for the latter as I run all my photos through software anyway.

 

[Reef Bass]

...get some software to remove the blue post processing.

Just to be clear, one doesn't want to edit the blue in the pic to remove it. What needs to happen is appropriate white balancing of the image, not just playing with blue.

The easiest and most accurate way to get pictures that look like what your eye sees when shooting under high color temperature lighting is to shoot in RAW and set your color temperature during post. It's as easy as moving a slider and the pics look great.

The Nikon D3100 supports RAW. Give it a shot. I know Canon cameras come with software to post process and I assume Nikons do too. You can always use Photoshop or LightRoom or other free stuff as well.

I've messed with custom white balances but they are a pain and less accurate than simply shooting in RAW mode.

 

[Misled]

I assume Nikons do too.

You assume correctly. And I agree with the rest of your post also.

 

[_Aaron_]

Just to be clear, one doesn't want to edit the blue in the pic to remove it. What needs to happen is appropriate white balancing of the image, not just playing with blue.

The easiest and most accurate way to get pictures that look like what your eye sees when shooting under high color temperature lighting is to shoot in RAW and set your color temperature during post. It's as easy as moving a slider and the pics look great.

The Nikon D3100 supports RAW. Give it a shot. I know Canon cameras come with software to post process and I assume Nikons do too. You can always use Photoshop or LightRoom or other free stuff as well.

I've messed with custom white balances but they are a pain and less accurate than simply shooting in RAW mode.

I actually meant remove the blue tone in pictures by changing the Kelvin of the image in post processing.

 

[Reef Bass]

Thanks for clarifying. Your pics demonstrate an understanding of this. I was trying to be specific for those who don't get why their pics are so blue and who might be tempted to simply remove blue as a fix.

Thanks for the annual giggle with the xmas avatar Jesse.

 

[_Aaron_]

Thanks for clarifying. Your pics demonstrate an understanding of this. I was trying to be specific for those who don't get why their pics are so blue and who might be tempted to simply remove blue as a fix.

Thanks for the annual giggle with the xmas avatar Jesse.

No worries.

Cheers.

 

[Misled]

Thanks for the annual giggle with the xmas avatar Jesse.

:wavehand: