What are the pro and cons of the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II Macro Lens for Nikon Digital SLR?
reading the reviews it sounds ok. I have a limited budget about $350.00. I know there are a lot better lenses. I have a Nikon D3100
woodsliv wrote:
What are the pro and cons of the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II Macro Lens for Nikon Digital SLR?
reading the reviews it sounds ok. I have a limited budget about $350.00. I know there are a lot better lenses. I have a Nikon D3100
Consider used or refurbished. Adorama, B&H, and KEH sell used and refurbs. Take a look at eBay, too. By getting a not-new lens or camera, you can spend less for a step-up model. Most of what I have was bought not-new.
It's not technically a macro lens as it only goes to 1:3.7 at 200mm. A true macro will get 1:1. 1:3.7 is pretty darn close though.
GoofyNewfie wrote:
sorry, internet hickups.
Thanks, I know there are better lens, but I have a limited budget
BHC
Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
woodsliv wrote:
What are the pro and cons of the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II Macro Lens for Nikon Digital SLR?
reading the reviews it sounds ok. I have a limited budget about $350.00. I know there are a lot better lenses. I have a Nikon D3100
I still do not understand why good photographers, especially if they own an 85 - 100mm prime lens (or longer) or a really high quality zoom, are not willing to try extension tubes or a bellows. You can save a lot of money and have a great deal of variation in lens distance and magnification. I urge you to give it a try, even if you have to rent or borrow the equipment for a weekend.
GoofyNewfie wrote:
It's not technically a macro lens as it only goes to 1:3.7 at 200mm. A true macro will get 1:1. 1:3.7 is pretty darn close though.
For comparison purposes (and a bit of perspective), let us round down to 1:4 magnification (1/4 life-size).
If we photograph a
single domino piece, which is 24-mm wide (approx. 1-inch) and 16-mm high (approx. 2/3-inch),
it will fill the viewfinder and the sensor of an APS-C format DSLR at 1:1 magnification (life-size), but at
1:4 magnification, you will have four dominoes left to right, times four dominoes top to bottom, for a total of
sixteen dominoes in one photo. Not even close to macro!
I don't understand. If you want a macro lens, get a macro lens. Why are you even looking at a super zoom?
I use this lens a lot and like it. Its not 1:1 true macro but it does a nice job for the money.
KEh.com has Tamron 90mm Macro lenses, which are wickedly awesome from what I hear, for less than $300
You'll soon be disappointed with your macro shots if you don't get a proper macro lens rather than a close-up lens.
Using extension tubes is a great and not too expensive option.
jecanes
Loc: Taumarunui, New Zealand
I have a 50mm f2.8 prime lens from my old Yashica SLR, I bought a reversing ring with 52mm thread for my d3100 and voila, I have a macro lens!
I have Canon,see you use Nikon. I would suggest whatever lens you get, my advise is not to use the hood when using your macro lens.The hood prevents the lens from getting that extra close-up you want while photographing the subject.
Hi: A long-time reader to the forum, but a first-time responder. I just picked up a canon 100mm f2.8 macro lens yesterday. Love it. Pricey, but a true macro, and I believe you get what you pay for in camera equipment, but that doesn't mean you have to buy new. You can get great used eqipment, but if interested in macro photography, do tyr to get a true macro lens.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.