Lens recommendations

[joeted]

Hello again all
Im in the market for a new macro lens and was wondering if anyone has any recomendations on a good cheapish one.Also what features should I look for in a macro lens. Ive read it must be a 1:1 ratio to be truly macro.
Aswell Ive been reading up on teleconverters and as i understand they are a cheap way of getting a bit closer to the subject when used with your telephoto lens, am i understanding right ? Can anyone also recomend a good teleconverter for me if that is the case please ?
Oh 1 more thing, sorry for all the questions, but im also interested in getting lens hoods.Ive got a lens hood for my 300mm sigma as it came with it but its a basic solid one (not a tulip hood or anything like that) would it be better to grab a tulip lens hood or another sort ? how do u know what size lens hood you need ? as i went to put the 300mm hood onto my 18-55mm lens and it was to big, would it be a case of looking for a lens hood with the figure 55mm or 18mm in the description ?
Once again sorry for all the questions but thought I'd get it all in 1 thread instead of creating loads of different ones lol.
Thanks loads in advance
P.s my camera is a nikon d60 if u need that info

[this_is_gav]

Sigma 150mm f2.8 HSM. It has HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor) too, which is Sigma's built-in autofocus motor for the D40, D40x, D5000 and D60.

[joeted]

any cheaper versions lol ?

[kalniel]

any cheaper versions lol ?

Tamron 90 is about the cheapest tele Macro while still being quite good.

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/prod...px?sku=1030805

You might be able to get cheaper ones that require you to get a bit closer.

[YorkieBen]

what camera are you using?

A cheap macro is the sigma 50mm that is available for most cameras.

A cheap alternative to a macro lens are macro/close up filters.

The hood for your sigma 70-300mm is fine, a tulip hood will not make a massive difference. If your lens does not come with a hood then a specific type should be available for it. Again what lens/camera combo are you using

Teleconverters are overrated imo, cheap teleconverters are poor quality, plus with slower (higher aperture number) lenses you will lose autofocus. Better off cropping unless you have good quality fast telephotos and a good quality (expensive) teleconverter

[kalniel]

what camera are you using?

A cheap macro is the sigma 50mm that is available for most cameras.

But won't auto focus on his D60.

[joeted]

But won't auto focus on his D60.

Cheers Kalniel
Ive heard that you wouldnt miss the auto focus on macro work as its mainly manual focus that u will use, is that correct ?
or is it best to have the auto focus just incase ?

[joeted]

what camera are you using?

A cheap macro is the sigma 50mm that is available for most cameras.

A cheap alternative to a macro lens are macro/close up filters.

The hood for your sigma 70-300mm is fine, a tulip hood will not make a massive difference. If your lens does not come with a hood then a specific type should be available for it. Again what lens/camera combo are you using

Teleconverters are overrated imo, cheap teleconverters are poor quality, plus with slower (higher aperture number) lenses you will lose autofocus. Better off cropping unless you have good quality fast telephotos and a good quality (expensive) teleconverter

Thanks Yorkieben
my lenses are the 18-55mm nikkor and the sigma 70-300mm and the camera is the nikon d60.
do you think the macro/close up filters are a better option for the time being?
my 70-300mm sigma has the macro feature on it but i want to get even closer to insects etc.

[YorkieBen]

alot of macro work is manual but for some things autofocus is useful to have. Nikon do the 60mm f/2.8 with af-s autofocus for the D60

[this_is_gav]

Cheers Kalniel
Ive heard that you wouldnt miss the auto focus on macro work as its mainly manual focus that u will use, is that correct ?
or is it best to have the auto focus just incase ?

It depends on whether it will only be used for macro work or not. Obviously macro lenses are perfectly usable for other tasks too - I use mine (the 150mm f2.8 I suggested) at motor-racing events whenever possible, as other than my 30mm f1.4, it's the sharpest glass I have, and is obviously relatively fast.

What you usually gain in sharpness with a prime, you lose in flexibility of zoom. If you can find opportunities to use them though, do so. For example, 50mm, while obviously not a great macro reach, can be ideal for portraits (though autofocus isn't exactly critical there either) and even a walk-about lens for some. 90mm should just about get you into candid-range.

Of course there are 'macro' lenses such as the cheap and cheerful Sigma 70-300mm APO, which are good value, but obviously no-where near the quality of half-decent glass. A mate of mine bought one for his D60 recently and I have to confess I was surprised at the quality. I was expecting it to be built like my 18-55mm D40x kit lens (which will be the same as your D60 kit lens I expect), but it feels a lot sturdier, heavier and generally seemed better than I expected quality wise. It is quite loud at autofocusing though. It's no-where as good as the 70-300mm Nikkor, but it's about 1/3 of the price too.

Don't confuse it with the non-APO, which isn't held in much regard by anyone, bargain-hunters included.

[kalniel]

Cheers Kalniel
Ive heard that you wouldnt miss the auto focus on macro work as its mainly manual focus that u will use, is that correct ?
or is it best to have the auto focus just incase ?

Good question. When I do macro with my point and shoot I always use manual focus, but that's because it struggles to lock at such close distances. On the other hand if you're further away with a longer macro it's a little bit easier for the lens and if it did manage to auto focus accurately then I probably would use it.

[Saracen]

......

Obviously macro lenses are perfectly usable for other tasks too ....

/pedant mode

Most, yes. But not all. There are specialist macro lenses that only work closed-focussed. Canon's MPE-65, for a start. Though admittedly, a Canon lens isn't a lot of use to the OP, as a Nikon user.

The point, though, is that while that statement is true the majority of the time, it's dangerous to assume it's always the case.

/pedant mode off.

[brammers]

If you want even closer than the 1:2 of a Siggy 70-300 then you need a proper macro lens.

As a D60 user you're pretty limited if you want a 'dual purpose' lens. Most of the macros won't AF and those that do have afterthought micro-motors crammed into them. Tamron 90 2.8 is probably the best example of this lot. The 60 and 105 micro-nikkors would be your best bets for dual purpose lenses with their excellent AF motors, but they may blow the budget. You'll get back almost 100% if you sell them on though.

If you want a dedicated macro lens then you can go a lot cheaper, look at Sigma 105 macro, Tamron 90 macro, Sigma 50 Macro, Tokina 100 macro, Cosina/Phoenix/Vivitar f3.5 macro (needs to have the adapter for 1:1). Just over 100 quid should do you 2nd hand - new for the Cosina.

Teleconverters are not the way to go with macro shooting. Extension tubes are much better and should be about 50quid a set 2nd hand.

You can also reverse an old lens for a very cheap and cheerful macro setup - an old 50 f1.4 (any brand) and a reversing ring should come to 30-40 quid.

[Whiternoise]

An old 50 f/1.4 for 40 quid?!

That must be pre-AI or pre anything really?

[brammers]

Whiternoise, when you reverse a lens you're not using any functions of the lens at all other than the aperture and the magnification. No autoanything.

The upside is that you get incredible magnification - often past 1:1.

Here's a couple of 50 1.8s that would be suitable for about 20quid each:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CARL-ZEISS-JEN...3%3A1|294%3A50

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CARL-ZEISS-JEN...3%3A1|294%3A50

The MC Super Takumars are very highly regarded for 1.4s, but ebay's a bit short atm.

[tfboy]

Whiternoise, when you reverse a lens you're not using any functions of the lens at all other than the aperture and the magnification. No autoanything.

The upside is that you get incredible magnification - often past 1:1.

Here's a couple of 50 1.8s that would be suitable for about 20quid each:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CARL-ZEISS-JEN...3%3A1|294%3A50

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CARL-ZEISS-JEN...3%3A1|294%3A50

The MC Super Takumars are very highly regarded for 1.4s, but ebay's a bit short atm.

They're the same auction

If you want to do it cheaply, going with tubes or reversing lenses is the best way. Sure, there's a bit of work involved, but macro is a work of patience and precision (says me who's never done proper 1:1 macro before)