JohnSwanda wrote:
Or you can use a higher ISO. I shoot macro in sunlight at ISO 800, easily capable for most DSLRs, and I can shoot at 1/500 at smaller apertures than 8 or 11. I only need to use flash on overcast days. I wouldn't use a ring light anyway, the light is too flat for me - I like the light to be somewhat directional.
1/500 is too slow for mobile subjects and wind blown static subjects
I have both the Nikon 105mm and 60mm macro lenses and I like them both. You have to get really close to the subject with the 60mm so it depends on what you will be shooting the most. Try buy used.
I have the Nikon 70-180mm f/4.5-5.6 AF Micro. Love it.
WCS wrote:
How would a macro lens treat this subject differently?
At the same magnification and aperture, you would be hard pressed to see much difference. Depth of field will be the same. A macro lens will produce better resolution in the corners, but they are out of focus in your example, so are of no importance. For most three-dimensional subjects, where the out-of-focus surround draws the eye to the main subject, good results can be had with any decent lens with extension tubes and/or a close-up lens (think achromat here for best IQ). Of course, the close focusing ability of macro lenses makes them more convenient to use, especially in the field - no accessories to fool with. And I would not consider focus stacking with any other than a macro or enlarging lens.
I have sigma macro, very nice. You can get a used lens in your price range, and I would ssuggest that. KEK or UsedPhotoPro are good sources.
lwheeler54 wrote:
Any recommendations for a macro lens for use with D500? Maybe in the $600 range or less. Thanks for any suggestions.
If you are interested I have an 80-200mm 2.8 D Nikon ED I want to get rid of! If you are interested we can talk via txt at 770-597-2681.
My name is Pat S.
lwheeler54 wrote:
Any recommendations for a macro lens for use with D500? Maybe in the $600 range or less. Thanks for any suggestions.
I have an 80-200mm 2.8 Nikon ED if you are interested! It was a gift to me but it is just to heavy for me with my back issues! If interested feel free to contact me via txt at 770 597 2681. I don’t use the lens and I want to sell it to someone that can get some use out of it! Txt me and I will send photos!
My name is Pat S.
Patricia Stoker wrote:
I have an 80-200mm 2.8 Nikon ED if you are interested! It was a gift to me but it is just to heavy for me with my back issues! If interested feel free to contact me via txt at 770 597 2681. I don’t use the lens and I want to sell it to someone that can get some use out of it! Txt me and I will send photos!
My name is Pat S.
Oops look like I sent the msg 2 times 😳
Patricia Stoker wrote:
I have an 80-200mm 2.8 Nikon ED if you are interested! It was a gift to me but it is just to heavy for me with my back issues! If interested feel free to contact me via txt at 770 597 2681. I don’t use the lens and I want to sell it to someone that can get some use out of it! Txt me and I will send photos!
My name is Pat S.
If you bothered to read the OP, you would know the topic is macro lens, which your lens is not. Rather than hijack this thread with a non-related subject, why not advertise your lens in the classified section? (Think common courtesy.)
The questions of "What do you want to shoot?" are largely irrelevant...if you have a macro lens, you shoot anything and everything that catches your eye, near or far.
I prefer the longer focal lengths, 100 or 105 mm, for the added working distance, and on my DX camera, the 150mm field of view. There are a LOT of the Nikon and Canon 100-105s on the used market, and you just have to wonder why? Caveat Emptor!
VR is a definite goodness, but adds much to the price of a good lens. A useful work-around is flash; either the built-in or a shoe mounted unit. Stops the shakies quite handily, and you can use a smaller aperture for better DOF.
The best "accessory" a person can get for their Macro lens is familiarity! Use it lots, learn its strong and weak points, and you will likely love your lens, of whatever make or model!
RWR wrote:
If you bothered to read the OP, you would know the topic is macro lens, which your lens is not. Rather than hijack this thread with a non-related subject, why not advertise your lens in the classified section? (Think common courtesy.)
maybe he was trying to do a big favor to OP and give him a good deal. your rude reply was much worse then him offering a lens he doesn't need
Sidwalkastronomy wrote:
maybe he was trying to do a big favor to OP and give him a good deal. your rude reply was much worse then him offering a lens he doesn't need
I don’t consider the reply rude. The offer didn’t belong in this thread and it was rude because of that. A private message or a separate thread would have been a better way to go.
Sidwalkastronomy wrote:
maybe he was trying to do a big favor to OP and give him a good deal. your rude reply was much worse then him offering a lens he doesn't need
Agreed the reply was worded very rudely. But the OP might have thought she was offering to sell a macro lens.
RWR wrote:
If you bothered to read the OP, you would know the topic is macro lens, which your lens is not. Rather than hijack this thread with a non-related subject, why not advertise your lens in the classified section? (Think common courtesy.)
God bless you and and your sincerity 🙏🏾
JohnSwanda wrote:
Agreed the reply was worded very rudely. But the OP might have thought she was offering to sell a macro lens.
Being rude is the new norm today! God bless you 🙏🏾
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.