Macro Lens for Nikon

[Simon]

perhaps, you should consider getting a 105mm without the VR

[valice]

The class wouldn't teach you all these things. They will only teach you about generic photography. Theory on shutter speed, aperture, exposure, composition.

I believe you are going for the Basic Photography Course by SLCC right?
Also, it wouldn't be equipment specific.

FOrget about the close-up filter now. Just use your 18-200.
Difference between dedicated macro and a zoom lens, is the 1:1 magnification. But to get 1:1, your depth-of-field (DOF, you will learn more during the course) is scarily thin, so your fish must be absolutely parallel to the glass for the whole fish to be in focused.

So for me, most of the time, I don't shoot 1:1. Means, I can actually survived without a macro lens, but shoot with my kit lens.

Another thing about macro lens, is that it is sharper as with all prime lens.

Not sure what the SU-800 is, but the good thing about Nikon system over the Canon is the built-in commander mode. Save 250 bucks.

[wasabi8888]

The class wouldn't teach you all these things. They will only teach you about generic photography. Theory on shutter speed, aperture, exposure, composition.

I believe you are going for the Basic Photography Course by SLCC right?
Also, it wouldn't be equipment specific.

FOrget about the close-up filter now. Just use your 18-200.
Difference between dedicated macro and a zoom lens, is the 1:1 magnification. But to get 1:1, your depth-of-field (DOF, you will learn more during the course) is scarily thin, so your fish must be absolutely parallel to the glass for the whole fish to be in focused.

So for me, most of the time, I don't shoot 1:1. Means, I can actually survived without a macro lens, but shoot with my kit lens.


Another thing about macro lens, is that it is sharper as with all prime lens.

Not sure what the SU-800 is, but the good thing about Nikon system over the Canon is the built-in commander mode. Save 250 bucks.

Vincent

So i need just to buy the flash? the SB800? anything else? dun tell me tripod hoh....

[valice]

You can say that. Nothing else for now if you only want to do fish photography.

Photoshop? For you to add nice nice borders and watermarks?

[wasabi8888]

VIncent

OK.. i understand...

But if I want to take pictures of insects' eyes, water droplets etc.. how will that change my specs?

Sorry for so many questions....

if i insist on using the 105VR, i can still attach close up filters rite?

[valice]

You can use the cheaper alternative of extension tubes instead.

[hwchoy]

use extension tube as close-up filters degrades the image, and shortens your working distance so much you'd be hard pressed to focus properly.

[Simon]

use a closeup filter like the canon 250D instead of a extension tube

[hwchoy]

I've tried the 250D on my 100mm macro, not good leh.

[Simon]

really? I used the 500D on my previous 70-300 sigma and it was extremely good, I printed a few photos at S8R and its still sharp

[hwchoy]

but 70-300 is only 2:1 macro. what's its working distance? the 100mm already only 6 inches from the front of the barrel, when I added a 250D (which is a +4 diopter, 500D is +2) the DOF is sooooo shallow and working distance so little its very impractical.

to be fair any pix will look fine when printed unless you are blowing to A1 or A0. to see any distortion I think you need to pixel peep. I can't tell the difference between the 250D and a Hoya +4 for that matter.

[Simon]

should be 90cm I think. It's quite obvious for the shallow DOF, the closer you are, the thiner the DOF is.

I can print part of the photo in A1/A0 for you to see. And yes, there is a world of a difference when you compare with a Hoya closeup filter. I used to have a +4 Hoya and the quality was really bad.

[hwchoy]

is it? I cannot tell the difference, but then it was on the G5.

I'm sure the 250D works fine with lenses, its just I find it very hard to use because its so little working distance.

[Goondoo]

should be 90cm I think. It's quite obvious for the shallow DOF, the closer you are, the thiner the DOF is.

I can print part of the photo in A1/A0 for you to see. And yes, there is a world of a difference when you compare with a Hoya closeup filter. I used to have a +4 Hoya and the quality was really bad.

Yea, the price too! but its really the best option you can get.

[Green Baron]

I have been using the Nikon 105 VR and non VR for a few days and I would definitely recommned the 105 VR. I find the 105 VR lens to be much brighter and the colour and bokeh is much better.

Btw, both the Nikon 105 Micros are IF.

[hwchoy]

ah better bokeh is defintely a good reason to pick the lens.

[wasabi8888]

wa... did not understand the last few posts...

so it's 105mm VR and extension tubes or close up filters? not that i know what is an extension tube

[StanChung]

Lol. With a macro/micro lens you would not need an extension tube unless you want to photograph even smaller fauna than a Celestial Pearl Danio[CPD].

I find shutter speed at 1/200 without flash will not freeze zippy subjects like rummy noses or CPD's.

Flash and a tripod is essential for fast moving subject macro photography because you need high DOF[depth of field-front to back sharpness] and high shutter speed. Only with flash that has around 1/10000 sec burst of light can freeze motion for something small and zippy. With a powerful flash, you can set your aperture smaller F22/32 to get more DOF.

The tripod is essential because you will get a major headache trying to hold the camera and look thru it for such a close up subject. Focussing will also be a nightmare. Get a good one. I bought a Gitzo mountaineer [no idea why as I'm not mountain goat. lol] it's light and sturdy. There are other good brands that are value for your money.

I would have bought the Nikon AF-D105 micro too if the specs were a little better. A bit disappointed that Nikon did not spice up the 105VR more to make it a must have. If certain apertures had better performance the lens would be the one to have. That said the 105VR lens is no slouch.

There's a whole load to read here http://www.aquaticquotient.com/forum...splay.php?f=16

Start programming your head with all these acronyms.

[valice]

The tripod is essential because you will get a major headache trying to hold the camera and look thru it for such a close up subject. Focussing will also be a nightmare. Get a good one. I bought a Gitzo mountaineer [no idea why as I'm not mountain goat. lol] it's light and sturdy. There are other good brands that are value for your money.

But it will be more of a headache if you use a tripod to shoot fish. Stan, you shooting fish using a tripod?

[wasabi8888]

Stan

That link does not go to a particular thread.. can you direct me to the rite thread?

Does the SB800 serve the purpose of getting a smaller aperture?
And it seems that i need a tripod as well.... i saw a good ball head the other day... The brand is Markins.. any comments?

Also, i see that you are using a 50mm prime lens.. i heard that is a must have... and that can be converted to a macro lens as well.. any comments?

I need to go shopping with someone that knows all this man... anyone wants to volunteer? food on me....