![]() You would need a Canon DSLR body to attach it to, pretty much any one would do, and you would need a macro flash set up. It does up to 5:1 magnification with no attachments needed but it is not cheap. If you are really serious about macro, the best macro lens available is the Canon MP-E 65mm. This is OK for large bugs like butterflies or dragonflies, but will not give you really close stuff like your jumper shot on your flickr. It is marketing hype, it will only do 1:2 close up. The Sigma 70-300 is not a macro lens, despite the name. Your Raynox, if it fits, can be used with these lenses to give more magnification, or extension tubes or both. Some 1:1 macro lenses similar to, but cheaper than, the Nikon 105mm are the Sigma 105mm, Tamron 90mm, Tokina 100mm. A good 1:1 prime macro lens on any DSLR body will give you similar results to what you are getting with your Panny/Raynox combo, but you will not see a huge improvement. My 105 macro is my first with the VR feature, and WOW, are they ever sharp I. Thanks in advance!!Īs you say, the lens is the factor in macro and the body is not such a big factor. Keep in mind, there is no one lens that is perfect for every shooting situation. Details Or fastest delivery Thursday, June 1. I have added a link to one of my macro images to give an idea of what I would like to achieve with the D5000 and hope that I would get better IQ. : 52MM 0.43x Wide Angle Conversion Lens with Macro for Nikon D3200, D3300, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5500, D7200, D90, D500, D600, D610, D700, D750, D800 : Electronics Electronics Camera & Photo Lenses Camera Lenses SLR Camera Lenses 1900 5.99 delivery Thursday, June 8. If anyone can give me any advice on the D5000 then that would be great I have had a look at reviews but would like to hear from members of this forum and if any have macros they could post then that would be great. I also have a Raynox dcr 250 which I use with my current camera which is a panasonic FZ28, and I have been getting good results, but I think its time to upgrade and want to make sure the D5000 would be a good choice. I do understand that its down to lens selection and although I would love to get the 105mm atm its out of my budget (if I go with the D5000!) and would look at the sigma 70-300mm macro, mate of mine got it for his d3000 and it looks impressive. With Nikon's 85 and 105 you pay a lot for the VR, which you may not need.Hi all I am seriously looking into purchasing a Nikon D5000 seems the price is right atm, one of my main interests is macro and would like to know what the D5000 is capable of. I would also be looking at the Tokina 35/2.8 macro and include the Nikon 60mm in my considerations as well. You don't give enough details on what you shoot, so it is tough to give a recommendation. ![]() All IF-design lenses change focal length with focal distance (focus breathing) which makes exact framing and composition quite a chore (consider a macro rail). If you shoot a lot from the tripod, then the lack of a tripod collar on the 105 will be a constant nuisance. The 105 appears to be the best compromise if you can only afford one lens. For portraits, 85 on a DX camera would be best, 105 would still do if you mostly shoot head shots even 85 can be a tad long for full body shots (i.e., you have to stand back farther). For insects, I would go with the 150 or 180, but those might be too long for portraits and plants don't know what you mean by products so can't make a recommendation there. From the spread of applications you mention I would say that there isn't one that fits all. Well, with focal length comes working distance - important when trying to fit lighting in there and also to not scare the insects by getting too close. Mainly interested in sharpness and contrast, not so much focal length.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |