Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DSLR Lens suggestios?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DSLR Lens suggestios?

    I'm kicking around getting a Nikon D50 to replace my Sony F717, but I'm kind of lost as to what lens I should be looking at getting for it. I'm going to be using it for Normal Photography and I also need the captibitly to do macro with it, but from what I understand Macro DSLR lenses are expensive. Any suggestions?
    Why is it called tourist season, if we can't shoot at them?

  • #2
    Cheap macrophotography 101;

    Just get a reverse lens macro adapter for the D50 (OR ANY OTHER CAM for that matter). These let you mount any lens with the adapters filter thread diameter (55mm & 52mm are commonly used) backwards for use as a cheap manual (no AF etc.) macro lens & get decent results, even if it looks a bit weird.

    The adapter will set you back <$20-30 USD & Nikon even makes one. Check eBay or bhphotovideo;



    In ye olden dayz we'd epoxy a Pentax lens adapter ring to a filter adapter ring to do the same thing, but now you can get one commercially so...

    An old photographers trick, but a goodie
    Last edited by Dr Mordrid; 15 May 2006, 01:59.
    Dr. Mordrid
    ----------------------------
    An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

    I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

    Comment


    • #3
      The reverse mount system works, even on DSLRs, but one looses all electronic features (autofocus, some exposure readings, ...).

      Many normal lenses have relatively short focus ranges (30 cm or so) for macro shots though, so it might be worth checking out the detailed specifications of a number of lenses.


      Jörg
      pixar
      Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow. (James Dean)

      Comment


      • #4

        This photo is made (by me) with a Nikon BR-2A adapter and a reversed 35-70 lens on my D70. It is difficulkt to focus, because the zoom ring and focus ring are reversed. You may have a lot of try and experience for it.
        A much better (more expensive) solution is a macro lens. I plan to buy a Tamron 90/2,8.
        /Fred
        Last edited by Fred H; 4 June 2006, 08:22.
        It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings...
        ------------------------------------------------

        Comment


        • #5
          Interesting as I'm looking into this. Canon 350

          I need Macro for the odd shot and fairly good zoom range. I was looking at the Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DG Macro (Canon Af).

          Read a few reviews and it said it was crap so I dunno.
          Chief Lemon Buyer no more Linux sucks but not as much
          Weather nut and sad git.

          My Weather Page

          Comment


          • #6
            The Sigma 28-300 is near a "Superzoom" lens. Better Sigma for macro is the 70-300 APO...etc (the (APO is best). It allowes to take 1:2 macro in 300 mm setting. But a zoom lens is not the best macro. I considered a lot of alternatives to my Nikon D70. Some of them could be used for Canon.
            One alt. Sigma 70-300 APO + Tamron 90/2.8
            Another Sigma 150/2.8 which is a very sharp lens, a good macro (one of the best) and a midle range tele, but not zoom.
            The problem with the 150/2.8 is that the AF is unstable with closer distance (under 52 cm) and very unstable when using the 1,4X teleconverter. The AF doesn't even works with the 2X teleconverter.
            My final decision is now a Nikon 18-200 VR lens (only for Nikons) and plan for the future (next year) a Tamron 90/2.8 macro lens. I tested the Tamron and it is a fantastic macro lens.
            [Edit] Some friends of mine have the Sigma 28-300 and they are NOT satisfied. For the first, in 300 mm it is very, very soft or unsharp. You need a tripod anyway.
            A sugestion: look after the new Sigma 70-200/2.8-Macro lens. It is expensive but you can get 1:3.5 macro. This lens is very new and I am not sure you can buy it, yet. It is a heavi lens of about 1.5 kg.
            /Fred
            Last edited by Fred H; 5 June 2006, 09:56.
            It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings...
            ------------------------------------------------

            Comment


            • #7
              Nice lense but way out of my price range. Any others top price range £250.
              Chief Lemon Buyer no more Linux sucks but not as much
              Weather nut and sad git.

              My Weather Page

              Comment


              • #8
                Considering the Sigma 28-300 and the Sigma 70-300 I would buy the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Zoom Macro Super. It has the fine 1:2 macro and it is the best buy lens for the price.
                Seek the http://www.pbase.com/ for sample photos. You'll find tons with the 70-300.
                And, read this one: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...d.php?t=172892
                /Fred
                Last edited by Fred H; 5 June 2006, 11:17.
                It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings...
                ------------------------------------------------

                Comment


                • #9
                  Cheers quite a price range on that one £114 to £160
                  Chief Lemon Buyer no more Linux sucks but not as much
                  Weather nut and sad git.

                  My Weather Page

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What ever you'll buy test the lens for back-focus. I heard that some Sigmas has backfocus problems. Just test it in the warranty period.
                    Again I recommend the 70-300 and the APO is worth the extra cost.
                    /Fred
                    It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings...
                    ------------------------------------------------

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I have a Canon DR with a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XrDi and I love the combination. The lens is tack sharp and it's great to have f/2.8 for low light shooting. The drawback of this lens on a 1.6 crop camera in my opinion is that it's not very wide (46mm in 50mm terms) which can be a problem indoors.

                      - Mark
                      - Mark

                      Core 2 Duo E6400 o/c 3.2GHz - Asus P5B Deluxe - 2048MB Corsair Twinx 6400C4 - ATI AIW X1900 - Seagate 7200.10 SATA 320GB primary - Western Digital SE16 SATA 320GB secondary - Samsung SATA Lightscribe DVD/CDRW- Midiland 4100 Speakers - Presonus Firepod - Dell FP2001 20" LCD - Windows XP Home

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Yes, Mark, the 28 mm lens in terms of 35 mm is not quite a wide lens. But the most common kit-lenses sold to a Canon DSLR camera (i.e. 350D) are 17-85 or 18-55.
                        For my Nikon D70 I have an 18-70mm kit-lens, which is enough for indoors. Therefore I will complete with a tele (a moderate one, 200 mm) and a macro (the Tamron 90/2.8).
                        I understand that ThePIT has the same intention for his 350D. I mean a second lens, a tele-zoom. Than a Sigma 70-300 APO Macro is my clear suggestion for his budget.
                        For only one alround zoom my choice would be a Sigma 18-200 superzoom (for Canon). But it is not a macro lens. I just ordered, for my D70, a Nikkor 18-200 VR. I don't know if there is an equivalent VR-lens for Canon.
                        The f 1:2.8 is indeed a good lens. On my wish list I've had the new Sigma 70-200/2.8. But the weight of 1.5 kg is too big for me. Therefore the 18-200 VR. The VR allowes 2-4 stops longer time without vibrations unsharp shoots. But it is not a cheap lens.
                        /Fred
                        Last edited by Fred H; 5 June 2006, 18:10.
                        It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings...
                        ------------------------------------------------

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X