I am interested in getting a Zoom lens but also interested in Macro photography. Here's where I'm at....
Nikon 70-300mm - No Good (Auto Focus doesn't work with my D3000 - can't take chances on blurry photos)
Nikon 55-200mm VR - Possible candidate (Can I add a Magnifier to this and get a decent shot? - Also, is a 10x HD² Professional Macro Lens going to yield the same results as a +10 Diopter? I don't THINK so but I don't know enough to even venture a guess)
Tamron 70-300mm Macro Zoom - Possible candidate (Reviews state that anything over the 200mm focal length isn't sharp. There are also mixed reviews on the Macro functionality. Also, it's heavy (15.3oz))
Sigma 70-300mm Macro Zoom - No Good (Too Heavy - 1.6lb)
A few questions...
Does anyone use any of these regularly?
Can you get a good closeup of say a bee or a butterfly without using Macro? (IE - Nikon 55-200mm)
Can you use a magnifier on the Nikon 55-200mm and still get a clear shot?
Is the 10x HD² Professional Macro Lens going to yield the same results as a +10 diopter?
Are there any others that I haven't seen/come across?
I NEED to get these to me by Friday since I have some stuff coming up this weekend I really need a zoom for. If anyone can help, that would be great. I've been online doing searches on forums all day and there are just some seriously mixed results.
I am an amateur photographer, obviously, and I don't take a lot of portraits (See my album for my 'usuals'). I only want to buy one zoom lens for now and I think this is going to be it for a while. So I want to make sure I get the 'right' one for me. My price range is under $200 ideally but I can spend more if I can get this bothersome weight of my shoulders. :)
Hi
I want a macro but will get a fixed 2.8 105mm sigma
However took this on a sigma 50mm 2.8 & cropped so make your own judgement. I also looked at Macro zooms & decided following the reading fixed focal lenght was the best & i like sigma so thats my big dave up now. HOwever Nikon do a 40mm & 60mm macro very cheap for a macro but a lot of the reports say go for 100mm min so you dont get too close to insects etc 7 scare them away
Hope this helps
I have a Tamron 60mm macro lens and love it. I am not aware of a good macro and zoom lens all-in-one option. If it is out there, I am certain it is well out of my budget. I think you are going to have to pick one. I know there are a lot of folks on here that get great macro shots using extension tubes, too.
Just remove your standard lens and turn it round and put it back to your camera and take photos holding it still and in place. This is called reverse macro and it's improvising and free but you need three hands to focus it, you can get in super-close. extension tubes also cost next to nothing. You can buy a good point and shoot with super-macro features cheaper than you can buy some specialist lens for macros for your Nikon. Good luck.
;)
I would start with the 55-200mm VR lens. It takes great shots consistently for me. I have some really great insect shots with that lens. I'm itching for a dedicated macro lens right now too!
Here are a couple I took with the 55-200mm VR lens....
@spthorne@autumnseden@mcdougall@snipsnap - THANKS! I'm going to try the 55-200mm VR. I have the +1, +2, +4, and +10 diopters but I also bought the 10x HD² Professional Macro Lens as well (it was $20). It looks like it might do the same things as the +10 diopter but for $20 I guess we'll just find out. Visually it doesn't look the same but the description is close.
The Tamron 70-300 is a lot lighter than the Sigma. My D3000 motor killed the autofocus in the Sigma, but I do like the Tamron as a beginner lens. I have a lot of photos with the Tamron in my project - my whole moon series at the first of September was taken with that lens.
Here are a few others
I haven't done macro with it very often, but here are a couple
@gurry@pocketmouse I have the reverse macro ring for my camera. I suppose I'll give it another go since i bought the 55-200MM VR and am now officially financially tapped out until after the Holidays. (I know it's only October, I have a HUGE family...)
Less than $10 for reverse macro! It's totally worth it! Here is my latest RM photo:
and here is a little more info about it (and another option: extension tubes) http://365project.org/discuss/general/6447/cheap-macro-2-options-reviewed
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I want a macro but will get a fixed 2.8 105mm sigma
However took this on a sigma 50mm 2.8 & cropped so make your own judgement. I also looked at Macro zooms & decided following the reading fixed focal lenght was the best & i like sigma so thats my big dave up now. HOwever Nikon do a 40mm & 60mm macro very cheap for a macro but a lot of the reports say go for 100mm min so you dont get too close to insects etc 7 scare them away
Hope this helps
too many numbers dudes.
Just remove your standard lens and turn it round and put it back to your camera and take photos holding it still and in place. This is called reverse macro and it's improvising and free but you need three hands to focus it, you can get in super-close. extension tubes also cost next to nothing. You can buy a good point and shoot with super-macro features cheaper than you can buy some specialist lens for macros for your Nikon. Good luck.
;)
Here are a couple I took with the 55-200mm VR lens....
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afd.htm http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/11-16mm.htm
Ken Rockwell has reviews and suggestions on a lot of other lenses. Good luck.
Here are a few others
I haven't done macro with it very often, but here are a couple
and here is a little more info about it (and another option: extension tubes) http://365project.org/discuss/general/6447/cheap-macro-2-options-reviewed