Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
which macro lens
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
Sep 9, 2017 18:49:37   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
The D750 will meter with the older manual focus lenses and there are 55mm Micro Nikkors as well as other older manual focus 55 mm lenses. I own 8 macro lenses from 55 to 180mm in length plus some are AF but most are MF.They won't have VR and of course they will focus to infinity unlike tubes. They are inexpensive as opposed to newer AF lenses with VR but if the lens is just for macro shots, that's all you need. If you think you will need it for other shots , other than macro, then you may want something a bit newer. I suspect that for those other shots you may want to use a zoom lens instead of a prime lens.

Reply
Sep 9, 2017 21:09:00   #
Bob Boner
 
If you plan to photograph insects, then I recommend the 150mm to 200mm macro lenses. With the shorter ones you will frequently scare the insect because you have to get so close to fill the frame. The nikon 200mm macro is one of the best I have ever used.

Reply
Sep 9, 2017 21:18:50   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
Bob Boner wrote:
If you plan to photograph insects, then I recommend the 150mm to 200mm macro lenses. With the shorter ones you will frequently scare the insect because you have to get so close to fill the frame. The nikon 200mm macro is one of the best I have ever used.

I have loads of insect images shot with a 105 that didn't scare off the insects

Reply
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.
Sep 9, 2017 22:10:40   #
par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.
 
Nikon 55MM micro AI-s
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/36984-USA/Nikon_1442_Macro_55mm_f_2_8_Micro.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55f28ais.htm

Reply
Sep 9, 2017 22:28:04   #
LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
I have loads of insect images shot with a 105 that didn't scare off the insects





Reply
Sep 9, 2017 22:37:27   #
Mugwamp
 
The Nikon 60mm Micro is a very nice lens. I have a D5600 and the auto focus does not function but that's no big deal. The 60mm is not a large lens. It's very sharp. You can pick these up used in like new condition from $170 - $180 just about any time you want on ebay. It is a little short being 60mm and you have to get quite close to you subject to shoot macro. So no close ups of rattlesnakes and such. Other than that its an absolutely wonderful lens and should be fantastic on a full frame camera.

Reply
Sep 9, 2017 23:19:33   #
Catchnreel Loc: Long Island NY
 
Mugwamp wrote:
The Nikon 60mm Micro is a very nice lens. I have a D5600 and the auto focus does not function but that's no big deal. The 60mm is not a large lens. It's very sharp. You can pick these up used in like new condition from $170 - $180 just about any time you want on ebay. It is a little short being 60mm and you have to get quite close to you subject to shoot macro. So no close ups of rattlesnakes and such. Other than that its an absolutely wonderful lens and should be fantastic on a full frame camera.
The Nikon 60mm Micro is a very nice lens. I have a... (show quote)


All these Have Been Taken With a D7200 Micro Lens and I Love It, Yeah You Got To Get Close But So What, That's half The Fun !
Enjoy !!











Reply
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.
Sep 10, 2017 01:03:47   #
10MPlayer Loc: California
 
There are experts on macro here on the macro section. I'm not one of them. But I do know that if you're doing true macro you will most likely be using a tripod. So in that case there's really no need for vibration compensation. If you're doing hand held closeups it will come in handy, especially in low light situations.

Reply
Sep 10, 2017 01:15:28   #
Mugwamp
 
Love those Bugs!

Reply
Sep 10, 2017 01:49:54   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
10MPlayer wrote:
There are experts on macro here on the macro section. I'm not one of them. But I do know that if you're doing true macro you will most likely be using a tripod. So in that case there's really no need for vibration compensation. If you're doing hand held closeups it will come in handy, especially in low light situations.

Almost none of my images over on Flickr had a tripod used on them. Better to use additional lighting than a tripod on live, mobile subjects for more than one reason.

Reply
Sep 19, 2017 16:12:40   #
alfeng Loc: Out where the West commences ...
 
wilderness wrote:
As some of you may know from seeing my gallery posts I take pictures of remote wilderness. Backpacks upwards to 33 days often with the use of climbing ropes means heavy loads. That coupled with the need to travel distances and keep up with my partners means I rarely carry a tripod ( the slot canyon Buckskin Gulch being one of the few exceptions). When I switched to digital ( had been shooting with a mamiya 7 with 80mm lens) I got a Nikon D 750 with the 24-120Vibration controlled lens so that I would only carry one lens for both weight reasons and not wanting to open my camera in dusty/sandy conditions- I often hike in Utah. I however do take fairly close up shots of mud often ( you can see my work at harveyhalpern.com). While not really macro I think I'd benefit from a macro lens. Which one? The Nikon 105 seems too massive. The Tamron 90 vibration controlled lens is only slightly lighter. Tempted by the Tamron non vibration controlled lens as it's quite a bit lighter and many websites seem to say that vibration control doesn't really work at macro ( which I rarely would be shooting that close). Any experience/suggestions from my fellow UHHers.
Thank you in advance.
As some of you may know from seeing my gallery pos... (show quote)

Of course, it's easy to spend OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY ...

I cannot tell how close you actually want to get to your subject OR the subsequent, relative magnification ...

I think that for many people (or, perhaps just myself!?!) the ability to focus a little closer than the normal range is all that is wanted ...

FWIW. One thing I determined when I was doing some testing several decades ago using CLOSE UP lenses on a fixed lens TLR is that you can get remarkably good results (I wanted to see if the slightly larger film format was worth the effort before I ponied up for something like a Mamiya TLR-or-SLR or a Hasselblad (!)) ...

Finally, a few months ago, armed with THAT knowledge that you can achieve excellent results (the underlying lens is the limitation) and trying to figure out what to do with the rather plebeian 14-42 "kit" lens designed for a Panasonic m4/3 camera I finally decided to pony up the meager amount (<$15 via an eBay vendor) for a set of CLOSE UP lenses ...

The main thing which I wanted to test was whether or not the auto-focus would still function ...

Allowing for the limited depth of field which a close up pic will generally have, it does based on the quickie test pics I made ..

Here are a couple of hand held, cropped by ~50% & re-sampled to 800x600, test pics of a "purple aster" taken with the +10 Diopter lens on the 14mm-42mm lens set at 42mm ... I think that the particular lens can actually perform a little better, but I haven't tried since I simply wanted to see if the lens could auto-focus, or not, with a close up lens attached ...

Obviously, a lens with some aperture control (I have never bothered to figure out if the particular lens has any user control beyond zooming) can have a greater depth of field ...

Obviously, a tripod would probably help, too!



(Download)


(Download)

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.