lens ?

chad508

chad508

New member
real quick ? what makes a macro lens macro. everything i've read say a macro is 100mm lense. would not a 200mm lens also be a macro? pls help out photo noob. i just purchased a nikon d80 and have been looking into a macro lens for the camera. and unsure if another lens would work but also be able to do other photography.
 
In very simplistic terms, a macro lens is just like a standard lens but has extra glass in it to allow it to have a shorter minimum focus; i.e. allows you to be closer to your subject. The extra magnification comes from working distance, not magic. :)
 
My favorite macro lens is the Canon EF 180mm f3.5L Macro USM. Nobody on these boards uses it because the 100mm version is 1/3 the price. The job of a macro lens is to fill the image sensor with a life size image of what you are photographing. So, if you are taking a picture of a polyp, the polyp will be just as large on the sensor itself as it is in real life, or 1:1. 2:1 means the polyp is twice as large on the image sensor as it actually is in real life. 1:2 mean the polyp is half the size as real life and isn't really macro IMO, even though some lenses may state otherwise on their box. A macro lens is a specialty lens. Having this lens "work" for 1:1 macro and also be able to do "other photography" isn't the goal or purpose, even if it is possible. For "other photography" you get a different lens for that photography's purpose. A macro lens is for macros. If you want to take pictures of your kids chasing your dog, you will need another lens. If you want to take pictures of birds, you will need another lens again. If you want to take pictures of mountains, there is a lens for that. Having a quiver of lenses to choose from and using each depending on the current subject or surroundings is the whole point of a DSLR. I don't know Nikon details, so maybe someone else can help you with specifics of which macros are available to you. I would guess the Nikkor 105mm macro will be your high quality choice, and the Sigma 105mm will be your slightly lower quality, slightly lower cost alternative. Canon has 5 current macro lenses to choose from between 50mm-180mm, so I would be surprised if those are your only 2 choices.
 
Last edited:
Nikon calls their macro lens 'micros'. Nikkor micro lenses are available in several focal lengths: 60mm, 85mm, 105mm and 200mm. The are also really excellent macros from Sigma in the 150mm and 180mm range which offer a Nikon mount.

The first macro lens which many people by is usually in the 100mm range macro. For Nikon, there are three choices around the $400-450 range: Tamron 90, Tokina 100 and Sigma 105. All are excellent. Nikon offers an excellent 105VR but it costs a lot more.

Another difference with macro lenses compared to regular lenses is that they are designed to have maximum sharpness and minimum distortion. They tend to have slow autofocus speeds but, for macro work, you are usually using manual focus. Most 100mm range macro lenses also do a very good job with portraits.
 
okay so if im reading this correctly the lens i currently have is a kit lens 18-55 mm 1:3.5-5.6g i know 18-55mm is the zoom distance. does the 1:3.5-5.6 stand for the size the image compared to the sensor? i thought it was the aputure range of the lens. i think im starting to get confused with all these numbers that im not use to. who thought a pic could be so involved.
 
There are problems with using a macro lens as a portrait lens however. Macros are very sharp and unflattering, revealing every skin impurity. Most subjects will not want to be shot with a macro lens after seeing the results, but there is always Photoshop.
 
Last edited:
f/3.5-5.6 stands for "focal length/3.5-5.6". Again I don't know Nikon so this terminology seems very strange to me. I am confident however that this is your aperture. The kit lens is no macro, it requires you to be a foot in front of your subject. I don't know the "maximum macro" capable of this lens, but I would guess 1:3 to be in the ball park.
 
Last edited:
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13799248#post13799248 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by chad508
okay so if im reading this correctly the lens i currently have is a kit lens 18-55 mm 1:3.5-5.6g i know 18-55mm is the zoom distance. does the 1:3.5-5.6 stand for the size the image compared to the sensor? i thought it was the aputure range of the lens. i think im starting to get confused with all these numbers that im not use to. who thought a pic could be so involved.
Click to expand...

18-55mm: gives the zoom range of the lens. This lens covers from a moderate wide angle to some degree of zoom, but doesn't give great zoom.

3.5-5.6: gives the aperture size. For the wide angle (18mm), the lens has a maximum opening of f/3.5. But, at 55mm, the maximum opening is only f/5.6.

The 'G' (and the other letters: ED AF-S Dx) are Nikon shorthand to describe the lens coatings, and other features (e.g. AF-S mean the lens contains a focus motor; Dx means that the lens is meant for cameras with smaller sensors).

None of these tell you about the ability of the lens to function for macro. But, if you look at the lens specifications, this lens can get down to 1:3. That is, the size of the image on the sensor is 1/3 of lifesize.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13799317#post13799317 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by chad508
i know this is not lens related but thought i would post one i thought turned out okay . any feed back would be great.
Click to expand...


The sand is a big clump of blown out highlights. The top left of the coral is also too bright for your camera to see. I would say the shot was overexposed a tick. You should look at a histogram as you shoot to control this unfortunate setback.
 
The aperture is EVERYTHING in a macro shot. Controlling depth of field or DOF takes priority over everything else. Since good macro lenses don't zoom in and out, Aperture is your only setting in camera that effects DOF. Distance from the subject is your other DOF controlling factor, but the whole point is to get as close as you can...so Apeture becomes everything.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13799361#post13799361 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by chad508

plus heres another pic. i feel this one is not as sharp but im learning
Click to expand...

Your shutter speed wasn't fast enough in this one. It seems overexposed to me as well.
 
Fish are harder to photograph than corals in some ways - they won't stay still :) You also don't need a 'true' macro to take pictures of full fish.

Most fish are at least 2" in length. The sensor in most cameras is about 1" x 1/2". A 1:1 macro will try to place a 2" fish image on the sensor, leading to truncation of part of the fish in the image. To photograph the entire fish in one image, you will end up changing the macro focus so that the magnification is only 1:3 (or less). Of course, the macro will let you get great blow-ups of the head or other parts of the fish. But, just to get fish photos and tank landscapes, you don't really need a macro lens.
 
i can see i need to take some classes on all of this. are ther any good books that explain everything in laymans terms?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13799445#post13799445 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by chad508
i can see i need to take some classes on all of this. are ther any good books that explain everything in laymans terms?
Click to expand...

Most people recommend Peterson's book 'Understanding exposures'. It's excellent but it might be a bit advanced. He also has another book 'Understanding Digital Photography.

You can find on-line tutorials (e.g. http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm). Google will help you find others. Also, many of the major cameras manufacturers offer on-line tutorials about their products.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13799248#post13799248 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by chad508
okay so if im reading this correctly the lens i currently have is a kit lens 18-55 mm 1:3.5-5.6g i know 18-55mm is the zoom distance. does the 1:3.5-5.6 stand for the size the image compared to the sensor? i thought it was the aputure range of the lens. i think im starting to get confused with all these numbers that im not use to. who thought a pic could be so involved.
Click to expand...

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but honestly, if you don't know this stuff you should read a couple of books. I know asking question is good, I do that too, but the very very basic stuff, I just read books instead of asking questions. You'll learn more from reading your owners manual about your camera than from anywhere else. shooting good picture, well that has to do with knowing how to use your equipments and practice practice practice.

I'm still a noob too so please excuse my comments if you're offended by them.
 
no problem, but i have read all over the internet and in a few forums, i just think i have info overload. as far as the above quote i got confused when TitusvileSurfer made a comment about sensor to image ratio. i was seeing his comment and looking at my lens and got confused. no harm no foul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

griss
Phone Camera Lens Kits
Replies
4
Views
775
Brian60077
Brian60077
Guygettnby
To reseal or not to reseal 120g.
Replies
5
Views
981
griss
griss
R
Cyano and nutrients
2 3
Replies
47
Views
9K
Radicalrob1982
R
J
Back into it!
Replies
7
Views
1K
jtroutt19
J
OrdinaryGirl
My 13.5 build - a wee reefie
Replies
15
Views
2K
OrdinaryGirl
OrdinaryGirl
Back
Top