Macros Lens vs .......

T

TDub

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
1,384
I have a quick question that maybe someone can answer or direct me to the answer.

I am working with a D80 Nikon with crop sensor for starters. Using it for taking images of PC components, all types. Current lenses I have: Nikon 18-200 VR1, 50mm 1.8 prime (older model). Flash is on-board and a SB-400.

Working area is in a small 10x12 room, against a white background, on a white surface. I am using amateur style lighting.

I would like to know is there any major advantages working with a macro lens (40mm - 60mm) over something like the Sigma 18-50 style macro lenses. I know the focal length on the macro lenses are greater than advertised due to the crop sensor. The goal is to get better than decent images of the components.

Thanks for any help on this.
 
I would actually recommend reading the Wiki on Macro Photography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_photography

Then figure out what you want your reproduction ratio to be and from what distance. Then I'd base your lens purchase off of that.

Edit: Your OP is a bit confusing. Are you asking about the difference between macro lenses vs non-macro lenses? Because in the OP it says 40-60mm Macros vs (paraphrasing) Sigma macros... which I don't really think the brand is as significant as a comparison between macros and non-macro lenses (the only other thing I think you could be asking is primes vs zoom macros?). If you want to know why a macro would be better for this than a non-macro lens (and this is a case in which I think a macro could be very handy... especially if you want a single chip or processor to take up the entire frame) then once again I direct you to the Wiki. You could also look up some stuff on Google about macro photography and its uses.
 
Last edited:
sorry about the confusion.

ok there are several companies that make fixed macros and them there are companies like Sigma that a 18-50mm f/2.8 EX Macros lens that has a range and is not a true 1:1 ratio.

UnknownSouljer said:
I would actually recommend reading the Wiki on Macro Photography: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_photography

Then figure out what you want your reproduction ratio to be and from what distance. Then I'd base your lens purchase off of that.

Edit: Your OP is a bit confusing. Are you asking about the difference between macro lenses vs non-macro lenses? Because in the OP it says 40-60mm Macros vs (paraphrasing) Sigma macros... which I don't really think the brand is as significant as a comparison between macros and non-macro lenses (the only other thing I think you could be asking is primes vs zoom macros?). If you want to know why a macro would be better for this than a non-macro lens (and this is a case in which I think a macro could be very handy... especially if you want a single chip or processor to take up the entire frame) then once again I direct you to the Wiki. You could also look up some stuff on Google about macro photography and its uses.
Click to expand...
 
I would take a true macro with 1:1. You'll be photographing non-moving objects. Get closer or further away as need be. With that in mind, it may be wise to get a 60 to 100mm macro. For anything wider than that at those distances and you might as well use a standard lens (IE: trying to get an entire motherboard into frame).
 
flip the 50mm around, set its aperture to 1.8, hold it to the front of the 18-200 and zoom that into 50mm or greater.

Boom done... free macro. :p
 
Can also hold the 50mm reversed directly to the camera, will have to manually focus it though. (moving the whole camera/lens further/closer)

Scour the web about "reversing rings" and "50mm reverse macro" etc. Tons of resources about it all.
 
You can try a third-party bellows and just use your 50mm f/1.8 instead - http://amzn.com/B003EDYDVM. It will give you 1:1 and more :)

Based on a guide for a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 on a Nikon PB-6 bellows...

Ratio 1:1 @ 52mm extension of bellows @ 54.3mm working distance
Ratio 2:1 @ 103mm extension of bellows @ 28.5mm working distance
Ratio 3:1 @ 155mm extension of bellows (seems that the Fotodiox version will max out at 150mm) @ 19.9mm working distance

^Working distance is the subject plane in focus and the front element of the lense itself.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
A zoom lense is not going to give you neear as high quality of photo as a real macro lens or a reversed prime lens.

Stacking a prime with a zoom is also going to give less quality than a macro or reversed prime.

You can get reversing rings off of Ebay for a couple dollars.

If using a reversing ring, you will want a lens that you can adjust the aperture on manually.
 
Thanks for the advice.everyone.

I think I will experiment with Aki option and get some extension tubes and a reversing ring to see how they work out. Seems cheap enough. If it doesn't work out a new lens will be in order.

the ex. tube idea came along after seeing this: Youtube
 
thanks for all the advice.

i decided to go with a macro lens.

Got a Sigma 50mm off of eBay as a starter lens. and so far has worked out great. $150 not too bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top