English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have $275 spending limit. Any brands is fine as long as it takes good pictures.

2007-01-21 15:05:49 · 4 answers · asked by johnie walker 1 in Consumer Electronics Cameras

4 answers

I can not vouch for the quality, but the Sigma Normal 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Autofocus is within your price range. You will have to look around for on-line reviews (such as http://www.popphoto.com/lensIndex/ ) to see what they say about this or other lenses. At least it is a true macro and goes all the way to a 1:1 image ratio.

Personally, I use the Nikon Normal Macro 60mm f/2.8D AF Autofocus Lens and I can tell you that it is a superb lens. It costs $400, though. I just checked on eBay and I do not see any used 60 mm lenses for sale. You might find one there from time to time if you keep checking.

2007-01-22 16:08:56 · answer #1 · answered by Jess 5 · 0 0

A previous responder had it right, you won't get much for $275. A secondhand one maybe but then it's going to old, probably well used and certainly lacking the newer functionalities. If you really want to get into macro photography, then the Nikon 105mm micro is the Rolls Royce of these types of lenses. The new one also has VR Vibration Reduction which makes a great lens for portraiture and short tele work without a tripod. Cost is high of course with such a lens. But there are older versions without VR and fast; f2.8. but you'll probably have to go used.
Another way is to use extension tubes. These tubes usually come in a set of three, each one a different thickness and they are mounted between your regular lens and the camera body. You either use one, two or three depending upon how near you want to get to your subject. They are fairly inexpensive and if you use the Nikon ones, your automatic features will still work (though focussing should always be manual). The one disadvantage with tubes is that you loose some light so you'll have to extend your exposure times, that means using a tripod but I would imagine you use one anyway for this type of work.
Another solution and the cheapest, is to buy some closeup filters. These are like regular filters which screw onto the end of your lens. Buy good quality ones and the quality can be pretty good. They certainly are a cost effective way of trying out macro photography before deciding to make the big splash on a quality lens. Hope this helps.

2007-01-22 03:45:41 · answer #2 · answered by Peter the Great! 2 · 0 0

$275 is not going to get you a good lens. I recommond saving up for a better lens. At least $400. I didnt bother buying a new lens until it got over $1000. Thats where the best quality is.

Do research, I dont own a Nikon camera so I cant tell you what to buy and what not to buy, I just recommond though you save a few more hundred to buy a decent lens rather than a cheap crappy lens

2007-01-22 00:12:44 · answer #3 · answered by Koko 4 · 1 0

It really depends on how close you will be to the insects; although, I myself own a D50 and have taken immaculate close-ups of flowers and plants with extreme detail. I just set the close up feature and was at least 12 inches from the blooming flowers.

2007-01-22 02:42:28 · answer #4 · answered by Wrnchtrnr 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers