|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2
|
![]()
Hi everyone,
I got a D90 not to long ago and have been playing around with it. it came withan an 18-105mm lens and it works well, however i would like to start some macro photography, and i wanted to know what would be the best macro lens to get. I'm new at this, so my photography terminology is not that great. Any help is appreciated. Thanks ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
|
![]()
The sigma 105mm f2.8 is a very nice marco, I was considering it as an option for my canon. It is reasonably price for a lens of this size, and like the canon, do true marco at 1:1.
Last edited by shoturtle; Jan 21, 2010 at 6:16 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]()
There are no bad macro lenses. Your choice of a macro lens should depend on what you want to shoot. If you want to shoot insects and other animate subjects, you should get a longer lens so you don't block your own light or frighten the subject. If you'll be shooting inanimate objects in a controlled environment, you might want a shorter lens so you don't have to back away too far.
The Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro that shoturtle mentioned is a very good choice, though Nikon's are better. Also, Nikon has two stabilized macro lenses, the 100mm/ f/2.8 and the 85mm f/3.5, that could allow you to use longer shutter speeds without a tripod. While Sigma, Tamron and Tokina all make very good macro lenses, none are stabilized.
__________________
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,009
|
![]()
i have the sigma 105 lens and i think its very good
i may be wrong but i thought stabalization with macro photography was a bit pointless because of the short focal length. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,826
|
![]() Quote:
And not everybody that wants to shoot macro photography wants to shoot 1:1 macrophotography.
__________________
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 613
|
![]()
have the tamron 90mm macro and its bitingly sharp nice colour redition - also makes for a nice portrait lens too
__________________
Flickr PENTAX K-5 & PENTAX K-7 Pentax-DA 12-24mm f4 | Pentax-DA* 16-50mm f2.8 | Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 | Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro | Pentax-DA* 60-250mm f4 | Sigma 150-500mm Pentax Photo Gallery |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
|
![]()
I have a Sigma 50mm which I've used for about 10 years and I'm very happy with. Picture below taken with 50mm.
![]() I've also got a Tamron 90mm macro to give a bit more working distance. I've had this about 12 months and it's a very good lens. A 90mm shot below. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
|
![]()
Expensive, but I find my Nikkor 105mm brilliant both for macro and portraiture. I've no experience of the Sigma and I see Tamron do a 90mm f2.8 as well. Might be worth considering the alternatives.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2
|
![]()
I'm assuming that Sigma and Tamron are compatible with the Nikon D 90 body?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
|
![]()
Yup,
The sigma form what I can tell, AF faster the the tamron. It may be a consideration if the lens is going to do double duty. But they are not that fast compare to regular prime lenses in AF.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it. Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter. Last edited by shoturtle; Jan 21, 2010 at 6:17 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|