|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
|
![]()
I have a Nikon D5100 with the kit lens (18-55mm) and the Nikon 55-300mm. I wish to purchase one more lens for it. I have narrowed the choices down to two lenses. The Nikkor AF-S DX 35MM F/1.8G and the Nikkor AF-S DX "MICRO" 40MM F/2.8G. I can't afford both at this time, Which one of the two would you choose ? Thanks.
|
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
What do you want to do now that you can't with the lenses you've got?
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
|
![]()
macro
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
Well, that narrows it down.
What do you want to shoot? The reason I ask is that, generally speaking, you select a macro lens based on your subject. You would use a short focal length macro lens for inanimate objects in a well lit environment, but you would use a long focal length macro lens for subjects you don't want to disturb, or for when you don't want to block your own light. The AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G you mentioned would be good for watch parts, jewelry and the like, but not for butterflies or frogs, and definitely not for snakes and hornets. Is that the kind of macro you've got in mind?
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
|
![]()
Yes, somewhat, but it would be nice to get a few macro shots of those snakes and hornets you mentioned but I can't afford the Nikkor AF-S VR Micro 105MM F/2.8 IF-ED lens.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
Actually, for the snakes and hornets, you'd need something like the AF Micro-NIKKOR 200mm f/4D IF-ED. For bugs, etc., something like the AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR or the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED would be ok. The AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G is for stuff you need to look through the viewfinder while reaching around the camera to position and adjust.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,191
|
![]()
If you indeed want to get involved in macro photography a couple of lenses that would give you some flexibility to shoot a broader range of subjects are :
Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro & Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. In each case, I'm recommending the older version (non stabilized) of the lens. Reason being, in most macro situations a tripod should be used effectively eliminating the need for a lens with image stabilization. Both of these lenses can be found on the used market for about the same cost as a new 40mm macro. You can read reviews of both of these stellar lenses on SLRgear.com FWIW, I own the Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro. Bought it used at KEH.com ad love the results. Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/ So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 142
|
![]()
Thanks everyone, great advice. I may consider the used market to make it more affordable for me and to save some money, however I hope that the non Nikon brands that were suggested are of equal quality as compared to the Nikon brand lenses. I have no experience with them. I have always been very satisfied with Nikon glass.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,191
|
![]() Quote:
Here is a link to the Sigma 105mm macro review: http://slrgear.com/reviews/showprodu...uct/221/cat/30 As for buying used, lenses - unlike camera bodies- last for many years. I tend to buy used lenses from reputable online dealers such as KEH.com, B&HPhoto.co and Adorama.com. All three rate the products they sell and stand behind them should something go wrong. Good luck with whatever you decide is right for you. Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/ So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
There are no bad macro lenses. While the third party macro lenses generally have slightly more field curvature (soft corners) than the OEM lenses, they are still very good. And while I conceed that 1:1 macro definitely needs a tripod, lesser magnification ratios, such as you might use on a hike or casual exploration, benefit from image stabilization and save you from being encumbered with the extra gear on your expedition.
It depends on what you'll be shooting, which you still haven't mentioned.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|