Macro Lenses!

cherrypink · Jul 11, 2003

Hello - I was thinking of buying a Macro Lens for my Nikon camera, now at the moment I am thinking of the Sigma 50mm or a 105mm lens. All I know is that one is longer than the other, but dose anyone know what the advantages/disadvantages of having a macro lens like this? Does anyone know if these Sigma macros are any good? Thanks! :lol:

dlc · Jul 11, 2003

The Sigma is a good lens, but you will probably need to focus manually with it. It has a focus hunt problem at the minimum distance, but other macros do too at times depending on lighting and subject.

The longer the focal length, the more working distance you have between the subject and lens. This is a better arrangement if you are shooting insects. The 100/105mm range is the most common, but there are macros in the 180/200mm range that are excellent but more $$$.

photobug · Jul 11, 2003

I can't speak specifically to the Sigma lenses, but the longer lens wil give you a bit more room between you and your subject than the shorter lens will.

If you haven't done any macro work before you might consider getting a macro reversing ring. That allows you to attach 2 lenses together face-to-face to get a macro effect using your existing lenses.

This is a cost effective method, as the rings cost less than $15.

hth

Jim

voodoocat · Jul 11, 2003

photobug said:
If you haven't done any macro work before you might consider getting a macro reversing ring. That allows you to attach 2 lenses together face-to-face to get a macro effect using your existing lenses.

This is a cost effective method, as the rings cost less than $15.

Don't expect to find this at your local camera shop. I called every single one in the Phoenix area and they didn't carry it. I ordered it from B & H Photo. If you get it there snag some cheap film, cause shipping will be the same regardless.

With a 100mm attached to the camera and a 50mm reversed on front, you get 2:1. I was focusing on my keyboard and a single key overfilled the frame.

Westone · Jul 11, 2003

Hello
I use the Nikkor 105mm macro. This keeps me from the subject matter and allows me to use close up diopters sp?? if I wish to go closer than a 1 to 1 magnification. I'm a Nikon user and would suggest you stay with Nikkor if possible. My 2 cents!

Chuck

MDowdey · Jul 11, 2003

ive heard "things" about the sigma's too so buyer beware. Jim's idea is excellent though...id try that first.

md

cherrypink · Jul 12, 2003

Ooh thanks for all the advice. I read a review today on Macro Lenses in a magazine called Photography Monthly, they highly recommend a lens by Tamron - 90mm. But I think I may check out the adapter thing first if I can find it!

MDowdey · Jul 12, 2003

good call cherry!

md

John A · Jul 12, 2003

I have to go along with Westone's comment, stick with Nikon if the bank balance allows. I use the same lens, Micro Nikkor 105mm 1:1.28 & love it. I have also tried close-up rings but not with anywhere near the same results, but they are not a bad place to start. Beware, macro photography is habit forming.

Tsunami1981 · Jul 20, 2003

I have a Tamron 28-300 Macro Lens and I love it... I would highly recommend it. I paid around the $500 range.

tr0gd0o0r · Jul 20, 2003

I haven't done a whole lot of macro stuff, but i've played around with some cluse up filters. I don't know how far they let you get from your subject, but they're a lot cheaper than a new lense. I haven't looked at the adaptor yet, but the filters will prolly be easier to transport and stuff.