mleuck

There no rules. Use a lens you wish to use.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

You need to quote the comment you are referring to. Nobody has a clue what you are talking about.

Brent Rowlett Loc: Atlanta, GA

The Canon 100 macro 2.8 is an excellent macro lens and great for portraits. Otherwise, invest in some more lenses on either side of 100mm. If you are looking for the all around catch all utility lens, I would start with the 24-70mm f-2.8.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Sure but you are stuck with a prime. As long as you have the ability to use you feet. I don't find a prime good for general photography aka a walking around lens. Inevitably you will be too close or too far away. The have a place but............

wanderingbear Loc: San Diego

I have a Nikon 105 and now use it about 80% of the time. I went a little longer to be able to do insects, bees, etc. without disturbing them. I do a lot of flowers, both Macro and close up. I can also take a clear photo at several hundred yards. To answer your question Yes.

The Bear

traveling chef 37

I've used various Nikon F film cameras over the years, and after several years, bought a digital Nikon. I love the 60mm macro that I've used since the late 80's, and kept it to use some time in the future. There came a day when we went on vacation to Vacation Land, Maine, and I realized I only had that one lens with me to use on my digital. I thought, vacation ruined. Sure, I always take some macros, but that's not the main focus of such trips. None the less, I screwed it on, and began shooting. It took a bit of getting used to, being spoiled by zoom lenses, you know, getting back far enough, and framing properly. But once under way, all of a sudden, I forgot I was using a fixed macro. The unexpected result was that I was taking pictures that far exceeded what I had been doing with the zoom. Go figure. The lens caused me to take a bit more time with composition, focus and light. It's not for every occasion, for sure, but when it's right, it's now my go to lens. I love this lens. J

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

That is quite a statement! I would like to think you have sufficient data to show it: every macro lens from every manufacturer is not designed to focus at a distance... hummm...

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Nope.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

Nope to what??

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

My 2¢, why not?

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

What are you referring to?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Yup, Jim ... I looked at that one, too ... got a lotta gold on it, if I remember, rightly ... around $500, right? ... That's not a macro, though, is it, Jim?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Kinda boring, if you didn't get to do the prints, as well - regularly ... huh, D?

I can understand why you switched jobs ... er - what did you switch to ... may I ask?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

That's good to know, Go ... especially, since it's the cheapest 100mm Macro out there ...

Only thing is - you have to deal with that stupid push-pull thing to lock in ... and when you do that - you move the focus point ....

I have the Tokina 35 Pro DX Macro .... so I know how frustrating that is ... kinda hit and miss ...

But, on Long Distance shots ... doesn't really matter - huh, Go?

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Thanks for the tip on those magazines/websites- they will come in handy.

You may have missed some of the my points in my previous posts.

We all know that the average macro lens does not exactly turn into "the bottom of a soft drink bottle" when used at longer working distances. Nor is the average zoom lens riddled with extreme chromatic aberrations or the average decent quality filter cause total image degradation. It's all a matter of nuances. Of course, there are lenses that are better suited for specific kinds of work but even advanced enthusiasts and working professionals can not afford every kind of lens that is out there and we all have to compromise or improvise at times and still come up with acceptable results.

In my daily work as a commercial photographer, I have no time to "fiddle" with lenses or anythg else. A job comes in and I have to select the lens, lighting, materials accessories and props that I know, through experience, will fill the bill for the work at hand. We are constantly challenged by "creativity on demand, time constraints, looming deadlines and budgetary issues. I wish I had more time to "fiddle"!

The reason I mentioned the Imagon (sorry to have gone off topic) is that in my down time, I still like to experiment with other than standard procedures and equipment. This keeps the fun and enjoyment of photography for me and yields tools and techniques that I can also apply to my work and share with others.

The point I wanted to make is that creative photographers don't always need to go by the numbers, the lens specifications and the instructions. Experimentation and discovery is very productive and satisfying. Not every image needs to be razor sharp and nor does every traditional rule have to be followed at all times. One can make incredibly effective portraits with a wide angle lens and make a perfectly effective landscape image with a macro- it's not always necessary to be able to count every blade of grass in a scenic image. Too many photographs are totally preoccupied with gear statistics, specifications and acquisition and don't see the advantages and rewards of improvisation and resourcefulness.

If everyone did the same things in photography, wouldn't' it get kinda boring? Best regards!