Lens for Nikon d5100

[fjrabon]

The 50mm f/1.8 is a fine lens, but isn't really necessary for product photography. If you were going to get a second lens I would actually opt for a cheap non-VR 55-200 lens. If you want a prime, I'd go with the tamron 60mm macro lens. Which you may use occasionally for its ability to show fine detail and ultra close ups.

People on here tend to recommend the same lenses to everybody no matter what their needs are. I love the 50mm f/1.8 but it's not a lens Id ever really grab for product photography. And I certainly wouldn't get the 35mm f/1.8 for product photography.

For product photography what matters most is your lighting and tripod. It's one of the few genres of photography where upgrading your lenses will make almost no difference. You'll almost always be shooting at f/11 and most all decent lenses, including the kit lens, are good at f/11.

 

[Brond]

fjrabon! Thanks for that input - most useful!!

I actually do need to show the occasional close up - as I paint on the lamps, and people can't see it in person, it is nice to have the option to show people a nice crisp close up.

Why non-VR? Is that because I am relying on the tripod + remote release so it is unnecessary?

I found this for $170: Nikon 55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens on amazon. The tamron 60mm macro lens is a bit over my budget at about $500, but I would really like to know how much more bang I get for my buck, as in, is it better to save up and get the good stuff? Is quality greatly improved, is it easier to shoot with, does it mean that less post work is required? Help a newbie out with all his questions

f/11 - that is noted! I assume I will also try to keep a low ISO which means that shutter speed is where I can compensate - which is why the tripod is important.

 

[fjrabon]

fjrabon! Thanks for that input - most useful!!

I actually do need to show the occasional close up - as I paint on the lamps, and people can't see it in person, it is nice to have the option to show people a nice crisp close up.

Why non-VR? Is that because I am relying on the tripod + remote release so it is unnecessary?

I found this for $170: Nikon 55-200mm f4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor Zoom Lens on amazon. The tamron 60mm macro lens is a bit over my budget at about $500, but I would really like to know how much more bang I get for my buck, as in, is it better to save up and get the good stuff? Is quality greatly improved, is it easier to shoot with, does it mean that less post work is required? Help a newbie out with all his questions

f/11 - that is noted! I assume I will also try to keep a low ISO which means that shutter speed is where I can compensate - which is why the tripod is important.

VR can actually make things less sharp when you're on a tripod. It's like it tries to correct movement that's not there. Also it cuts down costs and isn't necessary when on a tripod.

Honestly for product photography you're probably fine with your kit lens and the cheap 55-200 nikon AF-S. I owned both of those lenses when I started out, and from f/8-f/11 they're as sharp as anything else.

On your D5100 ISO from 100-400 is completely imperceptible in difference. I usually go with ISO 200, so I can make a quick adjustment if I need an extra stop of light without adjusting all my other settings. I wouldn't hesitate to use even ISO 800 in a well lit product photography scenario, if I needed to. The main issue is that you rarely need to.

A tripod helps with sharpness, but for product photography it also is just easier to work with, since it keeps your camera in one consistent position. This allows you to adjust the product as necessary, but the camera stays put. It also keeps you from having to physically hold the camera, which can make your life a lot easier if you're doing a long session. Doing product photography without a good, easily adjustable tripod is kind of silly, imho. Invest in a very sturdy, heavy, steel tripod with a ball type locking mount and quick release plate. You don't need carbon fiber or whatever light material because you won't be lugging it around much. Get a big heavy steel manfrotto. Those things are rock solid stable, easy to work with in a studio and will make a much bigger difference than a moderately nicer lens or camera body would.

 

[Dave442]

The photo you gave as an example can be photographed using the D5100 and kit lens. My brother has that combination (he also picked up the 35mm f/1.8G lens at the same time).
The main thing is really the lighting, backdrop, and surface. The white lampshade is separated from the white background, the base of the lamp is reflected on the surface it is sitting on and there is a nice continuous reflection running down the base of the lamp.

 

[DGMPhotography]

fjrabon is correct. For what you're trying to shoot, your kit lens should be just fine. It's about the lighting in this case.

I was making more of a general recommendation. The 50mm is known as a nifty fifty because it can do a lot of things, and it's pretty cheap.

 

[astroNikon]

When I try to use f/8 it seems to have the effect that only what I am focusing on is sharp, and everything else is blurred. When I use f/20 the background is also sharp(-ish)... I guess practice makes... better

When you get more into it, you'll learn more about Depth of Field (DOF). This is related to the Aperture setting. For product photography (and everything else) DOF comes into play in isolating your subject from the foreground & background which helps even in a studio type setup. I wouldn't worry about it too much right now but if you want to read something about it ==> Understanding Depth of Field in Photography

 

[fjrabon]

When I try to use f/8 it seems to have the effect that only what I am focusing on is sharp, and everything else is blurred. When I use f/20 the background is also sharp(-ish)... I guess practice makes... better

When you get more into it, you'll learn more about Depth of Field (DOF). This is related to the Aperture setting. For product photography (and everything else) DOF comes into play in isolating your subject from the foreground & background which helps even in a studio type setup. I wouldn't worry about it too much right now but if you want to read something about it ==> Understanding Depth of Field in Photography

for most product photography you're going to have a plain white background though and thus background separation isn't important. Most product photography is a battle of getting *more* depth of field while not running into diffraction at tiny apertures. You're rarely considering if you want less depth of field, you usually are wanting more depth of field, but are worried about diffraction. High end product photography, ie luxury watches and the like, are often done by taking multiple shots with different focal points at f/8 (or whatever the lens' sharpest f/stop is) and then blinding them together in photoshop, so that everything is ultra sharp.

 

[Brond]

Guys, thanks so much!

I'll keep the link for understanding DOF - thanks for providing the it, astroNikon.

I'll get a 50mm f/1.8 when the time is right - but for now I'm focusing strictly on being able to produce good quality product shots. DGMPhotography, thanks for clarifying your point of view.

fjrabon - you're an onslaught of good info - thank you! I thought ISO had to be as low as possible to allow for more post production option without getting noise? But I'll keep in mind what you've said, and not worry so much about it, as long as I can averagely keep it at 200.

Check on going non-VR - and that it is cheaper, hey

Diffraction - I thought that it had to do with the object the light curves around as it passes through a slit, like leaves on a tree. But in this case the object is a lamp, there are no small openings where the light passes through... But you're saying that diffraction is more likely to happen at tiny apertures... so it isn't the light on the subject, but the light that passes through the opening (aperture) that causes the diffraction? But if I keep above f/8 and generally at f/11 I assume I should be safe from diffraction in most cases?

Get a good tripod he said, steel he said, sounded easy... and maybe it is, but so far I have not been able to find a fit. I found a manfretto heavy duty - but it is $750 and that is over my budget. I would totally appreciate it if you could point me in the direction of an adequate tripod!

Wow, there's a lot to product photography! I will remember what you've said, it is great knowledge if I ever has to perform such a blinding together process. Multiple shots with different focal point so everything is crisp.

 

[raventepes]

Hey there, and welcome to the forum.

So far, it seems like you're catching on pretty quick, which is excellent!

The first thing I thought about when I read the title of the thread was "Ok. Look around. Everything you see around you is a product. Some are big, some are small. Some need wide lenses to photograph, some need macro lenses to photograph, some need telephoto...". You get the idea here. Product photography is very broad in scope, and for much of it, your kit lens will do just fine! If I'd recommend a secondary lens, it would probably be a macro lens in the 100/105 range, but provided the lens you found on Amazon is in good condition, it'll do for other things.

A "Nifty-Fifty" is always a good lens to have in your bag. I definitely say get one whenever you can. They're very versatile. Also, I use a 70-300 VR a lot.

When it comes to a lens with VR, I say get one with it anyways. You never know when you'll be shooting handheld, and you'll sooner or later want the lens for other projects where a tripod isn't always that great to have (I also shoot a lot of weddings. Tripods get bulky and just plain in the way. I even hate shooting them with a monopod much of the time).

As for tripods, a light to medium weight tripod will do fine. A heavy tripod is completely (usually) unnecessary. Having said that, one thing that you need to keep in mind when choosing a tripod is the maximum weight load. Personally, when I choose a tripod, I think of the heaviest camera I'll put on it, the heaviest lens I'll have on it, and anything that might go into the hotshoe on top of your camera itself. For now, that's all I'd be concerned with. There are a plethora of other things that can factor into weight, but that's really all that needs to be covered. From there though, I'll add a few pounds "extra" for just in case. Usually, I'm good with about a 13-20lb maximum weight for a tripod. One of my favourite tripods is a Vangaurd Abeo Pro Amazon.com VANGUARD Abeo Pro 283CGH Tripod Black Camera Photo

It's pretty solid, light, and does the trick. Its pistol grip head's pretty nifty, too. You can use an optional cable that attaches a trigger to your camera, but I'd rather just use a corded remote shutter release. So far, it's done well in an Alaskan winter, and a 1 year old running around the house, but I'll see how it does hiking this summer. So far, I can recommend it, but for what you'll need it for, that'll be plenty. I do a lot of product work for what pays my bills, but I do natural photography for a hobby and use the same gear. One thing that I like about it (something that EVERY good tripod should do) is that it stays in place...exactly where I leave it...overnight. It's also fairly inexpensive compared to much of its competitors. Also, its functionality is INSANE! I recommend watching a product demo or two for it.

I hope at least some of that helps! Good luck

 

[Brond]

raventepes - thank you for your input!!

The tripod you recommend looks great! Still above my budget for the moment, but it's been bookmarked!

Good point on the VR - but again, it is all about budgetting, and right now it is getting the rest of the studio up (still need background, diffusers, reflectors, and surface), tripod, and the macro lens. Then it will be the nifty fifty as I think it will be great for lifestyle / mood shots. Lots of things to get, and starting up my business I constantly have to prioritize where to put my cash.

 

[DGMPhotography]

I have a Manfrotto tripod that my dad got me for about $80 ($60 now on Amazon Amazon.com Manfrotto MKC3-H01 Compact Photo-Movie Kit Black Camera Photo) from Best Buy. I'm using the same camera as you, and it has been great. No need to spend a ton of money if you're not going to be using it a ton, and if it's not a super expensive camera.

To your point about lifestyle, the nifty fifty, like I said, is good for just about anything. So don't limit yourself.

As for noise, I can usually take my D5100 to around 1000 before noticeable noise. And even then a little noise reduction goes a long way.

The one thing I would recommend, though, is don't worry about the "business" part of photography yet. Read about it if that's what interests you. But I wouldn't try to make money with it until you are experienced and know what you're doing. I made that mistake myself (thinking I could get rich doing photography) and didn't learn till almost half a year later that I needed to first and foremost enjoy taking pictures, and get good at it.

 

[Brond]

DGMPhotography! That is some wise advice you're giving me there, thanks for taking the time! However, my business isn't in photography (though I love taking pictures). I create high end art lamps, but you can have the coolest product in the world, but if no ones knows about it.... hence the need for quality images of my lamps.

I've previously hired a professional photographer, and was satisfied with the outcome (see the image I attached earlier in this thread), but when I complete a lamp, I need pictures taken of it, and it becomes rather expensive using a pro for just one lamp at the time. That's why I want to learn how to take quality product shots myself - not to become a pro, but to save money by being able to do it myself. And that is why the internet, this forum and you guys rock, because I am able to shave years of though learning, by listening to your advice.

I thought noise got "provoked" by post production in photoshop, and for that reason it was best to have as low ISO as possible to begin with --- but hey, I'm just a newbie, so I'll take your word for it!

Yeah, that's what I am coming to understand, that the nifty fifty is awesome in easily creating great mood shots. Thank you for your input on the tripod. I am beginning to get a good idea about what will serve me well in this endeavor.

 

[DGMPhotography]

Oh - I must have missed that your business was lamps!

That's really cool, and good on you! I knew a guy who sold sneakers who wanted to do the same thing.

Noise comes from your camera sensor getting overheated. Either an extremely long shutter speed, or high ISO can increase the noise. The only reason you'd get more noise in post production is if you raised the shadows/exposure, or increased the "grain." Note: grain is a term used in film, and noise is a term used for digital, but are basically the same.

 

[Brond]

I never considered that the camera sensor could get overheated! But yeah, I think the article that I read it is, was exactly an example where they wanted to raise exposure. Thanks for pointing that out. Interesting how different industries talk about the same thing but calls it differently.