Want to take a few macro shots with non-macro glass... what would you use?

Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
1,431
Location
Alaska
D300

50 1.8
17-55 2.8
18-200
70-200 2.8
tokina 12-24


which lens would you use for macro shots...

yes I know it's not a pretty list, but it's what I got....
 
Joined
Feb 29, 2008
Messages
61
Location
AZ
what is your intended subject?

if you want close macro i'd try reversing the 50 1.8. you can do it without a ring but you will need a steady hand. it can be quite fun once you get the hang of it.

you focus by moving closer and farther from the subject ( be sure the lens is focused at infinity ). switch the camera to manual, and meter before removing the lens; the camera will keep the shutter speed, then you have to manually dial in the aperture on the lens. also be sure to turn off auto-focus on the body. i don't think it would damage anything, but just in case...
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
1,572
Location
Texas
if spending money is an option, you can buy a canon 500D "filter" and throw that on your 70-200/2.8. it's not cheap, but will still cost less than a real macro lens.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
704
Location
Sydney, Australia
if spending money is an option, you can buy a canon 500D "filter" and throw that on your 70-200/2.8. it's not cheap, but will still cost less than a real macro lens.
If you want to try this out, get the 77mm size and stick it on the 70-200. I got one these things a couple of days ago ($129 from an EBAY HK seller). It works well on my 85/1.4 and I look forward to trying it on my 70-200 shortly - time and weather permitting.
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
467
Location
Hoffman Estates, IL
I have the 70-200 w/ 500D filter. It works great. The only problem that I can see with this combo is that the focusing distance is limited. You can only focus when you are a certain distance from the object/subject, a sweet spot. The sweet spot is very small, plus or minus an inch or so. Once you derived from this sweet spot, you will not be able to focus.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Me thinks you need to get some extension tubes. I think you will need to get some off brand one's for your AF glass. Another great little tool is the BR-2A reversing ring which will turn your 50 1.8 into a low budged macro. Another option is to just buy a beater 55 2,8/3.5 AI/AIS. You can pick them up for dirt cheap. And they still give you amazing IQ

Gregory
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
8,397
Location
LA (Lower Arkansas)
17-55 isn't too bad...

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
5,482
Location
NY
There's a 55 3.5 ai for sale over at Miranda.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/671903
Folks are asking him to list prices. Unlikely to be much above $100, if that.

I have an older 55 3.5 ai-modified micro and just love it. It seems easily the equal of the 60 2.8 micro that I once had.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Handheld, 1.60 at 3.5 (wide open).
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
304
Location
Earth
A very cheap solution is a achromat diopter (like the mentioned 500D), but I would take the 250D and put it on the 50/1.8. I did the same with the Zeiss 50/1.4, which is also not a macro lens, and got nice results. My second choice would be the mentioned Micro Nikkor.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
826
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
I vote for the BR-2A reversing ring - less than $30. Here are 2 pictures I took this afternoon; just playing around...

graham cracker with cinnamon: 50mm at 14
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


silk flower stamen: 50mm at 1.4
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
1,431
Location
Alaska
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
D300

50 1.8
17-55 2.8
18-200
70-200 2.8
tokina 12-24


which lens would you use for macro shots...

yes I know it's not a pretty list, but it's what I got....
Perhaps I should clarify...

Of the lenses listed above, which one would you use for macro shots?

I will be at a wedding next week with the above lenses... which one would you use for the macro shots?

No gadgets, no extra purchases, just those lenses listed above...
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Location
San Jose, CA
None of your lenses can take a macro, but some of them can take good closeups. Based on their max reproduction ratios, here's how they rank:

18-200 - 1:4.5
17-55 2.8 - 1:5
70-200 2.8 - 1:5.6
50 1.8 - 1:6.6
tokina 12-24 - 1:8
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
2,410
Location
Houston, Texas
None of your lenses can take a macro, but some of them can take good closeups. Based on their max reproduction ratios, here's how they rank:

18-200 - 1:4.5
17-55 2.8 - 1:5
70-200 2.8 - 1:5.6
50 1.8 - 1:6.6
tokina 12-24 - 1:8
Based on Franks listing, I would recommend the 17-55. It would be my 1st choice for a wedding anyway.
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
3,551
Location
Redmond, WA
Of what you have, I'd recommend the 17-55. It'll focus down to 14.2" and should produce better shots than the 18-200VR (unless you're shooting in dim enough light that you feel you really need the VR).

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom