Lens
Sep 3, 2013 09:52:10 #
I would like to purchase a macro lens for my Nikon D5200, any suggestions on mm size, quality, etc.?
Sep 3, 2013 09:53:35 #
"Please...."
Simple answer
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/advice/492817/complete-guide-to-choosing-lenses-macro-lenses.html
Simple answer
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/advice/492817/complete-guide-to-choosing-lenses-macro-lenses.html
Sep 3, 2013 10:12:49 #
Sep 3, 2013 13:03:37 #
PrairieSage wrote:
I would like to purchase a macro lens for my Nikon D5200, any suggestions on mm size, quality, etc.?
Several others have suggested the Nikon 105 and it is being used by several others that I'm aware of.
There is also a group expressively for true macro photography here;
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html
Sep 3, 2013 13:05:57 #
Sep 3, 2013 15:40:33 #
Take a good look at the Nikkor DX 85mm F3.5 Micro lens, I have found it amazingly sharp for a DX lens and its designed for your D5200 body in all respects.
Sep 3, 2013 16:10:55 #
The Nikon 105 which several people have suggested is an excellent lens. But the Tamaron 90mm F2.8 http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_macro/272e.html is also very good and cheaper than the Nikon.
Sep 3, 2013 19:05:28 #
StephenVL wrote:
The Nikon 105 which several people have suggested is an excellent lens. But the Tamaron 90mm F2.8 http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_macro/272e.html is also very good and cheaper than the Nikon.
I have the Tamron 90mm Macro lens. It is very sharp. I don't do macro any more, but it doubles up as a superb 'garden' lens (flowers, shrubs, etc). Just the right size & tack sharp. :D
Sep 4, 2013 05:51:03 #
Here we go again what ever people own is what they are going to recommend.
Sep 4, 2013 05:53:10 #
I just checked the Nikons at: http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Learn-And-Explore/Article/gnhy8b3m/macro-lenses.html
Partway down the page is a series of about 5 photos showing each Nikon macro lens, differing by mm, like from 40 to 105. I seems to me the 40mm gives an even depth of field on the entire object better than the 105, which may give you the insects head in focus while the body is blurred. I take this to have something to do with the wide angle of a 40mm lens? Is this true or just on this one sample where there subject is viewed sideways instead of headfirst? Wide angel seems to have a deeper depth of field? I know that wide angle seems to imply 'farther away', but not in a macro lens? My own personal style at the moment is to get the whole object in focus, I like bokeh but in the background...I did get a 50 mm Nikorr f1.4 prime lens, but I assume this is not a macro lens. What makes a lens macro if the mm number is not the criteria? (I know, I ask too many questions!)
Partway down the page is a series of about 5 photos showing each Nikon macro lens, differing by mm, like from 40 to 105. I seems to me the 40mm gives an even depth of field on the entire object better than the 105, which may give you the insects head in focus while the body is blurred. I take this to have something to do with the wide angle of a 40mm lens? Is this true or just on this one sample where there subject is viewed sideways instead of headfirst? Wide angel seems to have a deeper depth of field? I know that wide angle seems to imply 'farther away', but not in a macro lens? My own personal style at the moment is to get the whole object in focus, I like bokeh but in the background...I did get a 50 mm Nikorr f1.4 prime lens, but I assume this is not a macro lens. What makes a lens macro if the mm number is not the criteria? (I know, I ask too many questions!)
PrairieSage wrote:
I would like to purchase a macro lens for my Nikon D5200, any suggestions on mm size, quality, etc.?
Sep 4, 2013 06:03:20 #
georgevedwards wrote:
I just checked the Nikons at: http://www.nikonusa... (show quote)
The problem with the 40mm is that you have to get very close and could frighten off what you are trying to photo!
If your subject is a stationary object then the 40mm is OK. If it has the ability to 'walk/fly off' then thr 105mm would be better as it will give a greater working distance for the same 1-1 result.
Sep 4, 2013 06:29:29 #
Sigma 105, it's very sharp, fast focusing and at 105mm you can keep a fair distance from your subject, I rented the Nikon 105 and the decided to buy the Sigma
Sep 4, 2013 07:49:25 #
Thank you all for your comments. It helps to know what other photographers are using.
Sep 4, 2013 08:05:55 #
Sep 4, 2013 08:20:16 #
I've got 6 different macro lenses from 55mm to a35mm. Most are older manual focus lenses. My "go-to" lens is a mid 1980's "Lester Dine" 105mm F2.8...As has been mentioned, all "true" macro lenses will give you good results as long as your technique is correct. Since you are using a base model camera, the older lenses won't meter or auto focus with it. I shoot with a D300 & a D7100 & I can meter with them, although I tend to shoot manually more often (meaning I set the aperture & shutter speed myself in stead of having the camera do it) True macro shooting is best done by focusing manually. I mention older lenses as they will give you just as good results & save you some money, but as one using a base model, it can be an experience in frustration if you do not understand photographic principals. Whatever you decide, your best bet is a lens in the 105mm range as it will give you more working distance between you & your subject (thus not scaring off skittish critters like butterflies as easily)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.