Which inexpensive macro zoom for D40?

jenswrens

I am looking for a good but relatively inexpensive zoom lens for my Nikon D40. I want to be able to shoot a good close-up of a bird on the feeder or the ducks on the pond maybe 150 ft away, as well as get some nice shallow-depth-of-field shots of flowers & bugs, etc. The catch is I don't want to spend more than $200-250 on it (the less the better - b/c I'm saving up for the Canon I should've gotten in the first place). But in the meantime, I'm feeling stifled with just the D40 kit lens.

I've tried searching the forum & dpreview & online camera shops but the more I search the more confused I get - i.e., there are apparently 6 different 70-300 lenses & 3 different brands, etc, and maybe I'd rather have the 28-300 or the 55-200, or eekkk... I just don't know. And is the Tamron better than the Sigma or is one Nikon better than another, yada yada yada.

I'm just an amateur, so I thought I'd ask the pros....:D

Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Jen

ziggy53

Jen,

How far away is the bird feeder and what size bird do you generally see on it? Likewise, how far away are the ducks?

I can get really close to the ducks and geese at the river close to me because the area sees a lot of people and the animals are relatively tame, especially if you have some bread.

It would be nice if you knew about how much focal length you need.

Unfortunately, your budget is pretty limiting, so that may be what defines what you buy. The other thing that is limiting is the D40 itself because it lacks a focus screw drive that allows autofocus on lenses that lack an internal AF motor (so you need to use lenses with an internal AF motor).

Probably your best bet, IMO, is something like a Tamron 70-300mm, f4-f5.6 Di LD 1:2. If you think of it like a 70-200mm, f5.6-f8 it can yield very nice results. It is pretty soft at 300mm no matter what, but post-processing can help. The lens likes strong light and does not AF very quickly, especially in poor light, but it can give good results if you follow the parameters I've given.

This version will work OK on the Nikon D40:

http://www.adorama.com/TM70300DNKAN.html

A very good step up in quality, but a major step up from your budget, is the Sigma 70-200mm, f2.8 DG Macro HSM II. It would work in considerably more lighting situations and is sharper overall, but it's almost 3 times your budget.

Qarik

I don't believe there is a lens that fits both telephoto and macro that works auto focus on the d40 that is cheap. You best bet for bargain price is the 55-200mm VR AF-S. That will get you the far shot but not so good on the close shots (min focus is 3 feet)

If you have $700 then the 18-200mm VR AF-S has a min focus of 18 inches or so which can get okay macro shots but not great.

Tee Why

Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro comes to mind for me.

jenswrens

Thanks for the suggestions.

So... I've been looking at both the Tamron 70-300mm, f4-f5.6 Di LD and the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro and trying to compare them. They basically seem pretty much the same as far as specs go (unless I'm missing something, which is always possible!). I've also been browsing amazon b/c it's the only place I could find comparison photos from each lens. The price difference is pretty negligible.

So how to choose? Buy the more expensive one b/c its price means it must be better? Buy the one that's actually in stock b/c I'm impatient? The photos I looked at maybe seemed a little sharper with the Sigma, but I'm no expert critic. Maybe the quality difference between the two is also negligible, and I'm being silly. I do want to get the best lens I can for my tiny budget. I know it's probably just a cheapo baby lens to most of you guys and I probably should just pick whatever, but I'd also like to educate myself for future purchases. :-)

Sounds like the Tamron has a button you have to flip for macro, but I'm not sure if the Sigma does also. Does anyone know? Is that a big deal? What else should I be considering?

nickatnite

jenswrens wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions.

So... I've been looking at both the Tamron 70-300mm, f4-f5.6 Di LD and the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG Macro and trying to compare them. They basically seem pretty much the same as far as specs go (unless I'm missing something, which is always possible!). I've also been browsing amazon b/c it's the only place I could find comparison photos from each lens. The price difference is pretty negligible.

I ran across a used Tamron 70-300 on here and I like it. It has served me well so far. Plus I use it with my D-40. Here are a few shots.






Here is some wildlife:

Tee Why

Some comparisons I've seen in UK's mags tend to favor the Sigma over the Tamron. You may want to do an internet search and see if there are any direct comparisons online as well.

Chrissiebeez_NL

Hi Jen!

Mind you that the sigma 70-300 macro only does macro from 200-300 mm. maybe nice in nature but awful if you want to take macro shots indoor. you kinda have to stand at the other end of the room

I have the sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO and like the quality of the shots (for the price of course) but for indoors, i prefer fidling with reverse lens macro over the sigma . You have to be comfortable with raising the ISO though because the lens is slow slow slow..

@ Ziggy: I have heard that 300mm is awful from a lot of people on the internet but i dont agree. i think the 300 mm shots are very acceptable for the money

not saying one or the other but you CAN get good shots out of this lens. It's all up to you here some examples:


Canon 400d - Sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 300mm f = 8.0 ISO 1600


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 300 mm - f =7.1 ISO 400


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 238 mm - f =5.6 ISO 1600



Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 268mm - f =5.6 ISO 1600


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 300mm - f =9.0 ISO 100


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 190mm - f =5.0 ISO 1600


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 300mm - f =6.3 ISO 100


Canon 400d -sigma 70-300 APO DG MACRO @ 300mm - f =7.1 ISO 400