Macro suggestions?

[GravelBen]

Having spent an hour or two recently playing with a friend's macro setup I'm thinking about a macro lens for my D80, but I don't really know whats what with macro - friend's gear is a Pentax K30 with 35mm and 50mm f/2.8 macro primes, but that doesn't tell me too much about Nikon options.

I'd prefer not to sink too much cash so will probably buy second hand, have read a few reviews which tell me if lenses are good but not which ones would actually suit my needs(/wants). I've been enjoying taking photos of insects if that gives an idea of scale - is the 50mm range best for that, or would I get better results from something a bit longer? The 50mm I tried was an older full manual lens - I don't mind manual control but would prefer something with at least auto metering compatibility if I can, for simpler shooting.

My current line-up which an addition would be fitting in with is:

Nikon D80 (hoping to upgrade to a D7100 within the next year)
AF-S 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 G
AF 80-200 f/2.8 D
AF 50mm f/1.8 D

Are zooms with macro capability any good, or should I stick with a dedicated macro prime? There is a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 macro selling fairly cheap locally which might also be an upgrade for me as an all-rounder. Any cop using extension rings/reverse mounts etc with normal lenses as an alternative?

Apparently I'm full of questions... here are a few photos from playing with mates Pentax:


Fly on leaf (1) by gravelben, on Flickr


Fly on daisy (2) by gravelben, on Flickr


Flies eyes by gravelben, on Flickr


Earwig on daisy (1) by gravelben, on Flickr

[flat-planedCrank]

AFAIK macro is close to witchcraft (though I know it's expensive )

Big macro thread here - http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[richwig83]

Nikon? Macro? Decent Lens? Get the 105VR Nikkor (and the nikon macro flash kit)

[RobDickinson]

Zooms are absolutely worthless for macro, non of them are proper macro and even the best are only close to 1:2

Get a prime.

A 70-100mm range for bugs if not longer.

All macro primes (a)should be 1:1 and (b) should be damned good quality optics. There isnt really a bad one.

Tamron 90, sigma 70 and 105, the nikon one etc.

You can use extension tunes and bellows or reverse mount normal lenses for macro on the cheap.

[DavidJG]

If you're upgrading to the D7100, buy the highest quality glass that you can. I've recently bought a D7100 - the extra resolution and lack of low pass filter will reveal any weakness or poor optics in your lenses. I'm sticking with Nikon lenses only now, and having to replace some of the cheaper stuff that was OK with my previous camera (D90).

[Simpo Two]

All good advice so far - and your photos are very good, especially so for someone not used to macro.

A true macro lens will give you the 1:1 magnifcation you need (actually more on a DX Nikon); all the focal length does is determine how far from the subject you are. VR can be handy if you're not using flash as camera shake can be an issue.

NB If you'd be happy with second-hand, that will get you a better lens for fewer £.

[DibblyDobbler]

You'll probably find yourself shooting on full manual anyway so I wouldn't worry about that side of things - as above get yourself a prime, preferably around 100mm although you can do just fine with a 50mm.

You may find yourself wanting to use a flash (stopping down for depth of field while maintaining a decent shutter speed can be challenging!) but you don't need to spend a fortune - there's a guy on TP doing great things with a 50mm prime and onboard flash with paper plate diffuser!

Have fun and just ask away on the macro thread if you need to

[Gemm]

It seems to me you are in more need for better lighting (i.e. flash) than a lens?

[Simpo Two]

Gemm said:

It seems to me you are in more need for better lighting (i.e. flash) than a lens?

He was using a friend's macro lens and now wants his own.

[GravelBen]

Simpo Two said:

All good advice so far - and your photos are very good, especially so for someone not used to macro.

A true macro lens will give you the 1:1 magnifcation you need (actually more on a DX Nikon); all the focal length does is determine how far from the subject you are. VR can be handy if you're not using flash as camera shake can be an issue.

NB If you'd be happy with second-hand, that will get you a better lens for fewer £.

Thanks

That makes sense about the 1:1 and focal length, was starting to notice that with friends 35mm lens scaring off more bugs than the 50mm.

The Nikon 60mm f2.8 micro might be an option then, the 105 looks very nice but a bit out of price range at the moment unless I spot a bargain second hand.

I might grab a cheap reverse adaptor for my 50mm f1.8 and have a play with that too.

Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 31st December 23:43

[Simpo Two]

GravelBen said:

I might grab a cheap reverse adaptor for my 50mm f1.8 and have a play with that too.

It's a very cheap solution but of course will be manual everything.

In my film days I had a splendid gadget called a 'macro-focusing teleconverter' by Vivitar (when they were good). I then had the Micro Nikkor 60mm as you suggest, but found the length rather short so swapped it for a 105mm AF-D with another PHer (who found it too long!). It's mostly used for close-ups in the studio; if I was out and about then the later AF-S VR version might be a worthy investment.

I think a good s/h macro lens will hold its value.

[GravelBen]

DibblyDobbler said:

You'll probably find yourself shooting on full manual anyway so I wouldn't worry about that side of things - as above get yourself a prime, preferably around 100mm although you can do just fine with a 50mm.

You may find yourself wanting to use a flash (stopping down for depth of field while maintaining a decent shutter speed can be challenging!) but you don't need to spend a fortune - there's a guy on TP doing great things with a 50mm prime and onboard flash with paper plate diffuser!

Have fun and just ask away on the macro thread if you need to

Cheers, will have a poke around on that thread.

Paper plate diffuser is a good idea for getting onboard flash onto the object without being shadowed by the end of a close lens, I don't have a separate flash at this stage.

[GravelBen]

DavidJG said:

If you're upgrading to the D7100, buy the highest quality glass that you can. I've recently bought a D7100 - the extra resolution and lack of low pass filter will reveal any weakness or poor optics in your lenses. I'm sticking with Nikon lenses only now, and having to replace some of the cheaper stuff that was OK with my previous camera (D90).

Thanks for the warning, I might end up wanting to upgrade from the 18-70 when I get a D7100 then - its a bit full of dust! A second hand D300 is another option, but I'd prefer to stick with the smaller/lighter body as I carry my camera up mountains fairly often.

[GravelBen]

This article:

http://www.agataurbaniak.com/photolog/gear/58-extr...

is giving me ideas about reversing the 50mm onto the front of my 80-200, would be basically the same setup he is using and should give auto metering etc. At $10 for a male-male adapter it would be rude not to so I've ordered one to try out.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 1st January 08:13

[andy-xr]

Tamron 90mm is stunningly sharp! I've used it for headshots as well as dabbling in some macro. And it's really cheap, so you'll have money left over to buy some lighting too