Looking for a budget Macro lens.

KingofthehillKingofthehill Registered Users Posts: 68 Big grins
edited June 15, 2012 in Nikon Land
If you have one sitting in a case somewhere never being used and you could part with it, im interesetd.

Im open to all the brands but looking for it to AutoFocus by itself.

Thanks :D

Comments

  • r3t1awr3ydr3t1awr3yd Registered Users Posts: 1,000 Major grins
    edited June 4, 2012
    Have you tried a cheap older 50mm f/1.8 AF-S (like $110 new, cheaper used) with a reverse ring ($14)?
    Hi! I'm Wally: website | blog | facebook | IG | scotchNsniff
    Nikon addict. D610, Tok 11-16, Sig 24-35, Nik 24-70/70-200vr
  • wildviperwildviper Registered Users Posts: 560 Major grins
    edited June 5, 2012
    Hey Wally...what's a reverse ring? You have me intrigued now
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    WildViper
    From Nikon D70s > Nikon D300s & D700
    Nikon 50/1.8, Tamron 28-75/2.8 1st gen, Nikkor 12-24/4, Nikkor 70-200/2.8 ED VR, SB600, SB900, SB-26 and Gitzo 2 Series Carbon Fiber with Kirk Ballhead
  • r3t1awr3ydr3t1awr3yd Registered Users Posts: 1,000 Major grins
    edited June 5, 2012
    http://www.adorama.com/MCRRNK52.html

    So they're only $10 now :)

    It's a ring used to attach a lens to your body BACKWARDS. It give you a bit of macro capability.
    Hi! I'm Wally: website | blog | facebook | IG | scotchNsniff
    Nikon addict. D610, Tok 11-16, Sig 24-35, Nik 24-70/70-200vr
  • SeymoreSeymore Banned Posts: 1,539 Major grins
    edited June 6, 2012
    What wally is suggesting can work, but it's a hard lesson learned to find that the DOF is very narrow and quite limited. This is more like a super-macro and usually gives better than a 1:1 ratio, but the DOF is far <1/4"!

    The other option is longer FL lens and an extension ring. This will give you a long reach with a closer focus distance. Don't get me wrong... there is really no "good" way to get around a good macro lens. We're just telling you of other ways to use a "normal" lens for close(r)-up photography.


    IMO, you'd be happier with a true "macro" lens. Keep looking and good luck... <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/thumb.gif" border="0" alt="" >
  • time2smiletime2smile Registered Users Posts: 835 Major grins
    edited June 7, 2012
    FYI, dont get a 77mm one, the angle for the flash gets in the way on Nikon D90 and D7K
    Ted....
    It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
    Nikon
    http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com
  • jwearjwear Registered Users Posts: 8,013 Major grins
    edited June 9, 2012
    I have a 105 f2 non vr if that would interest you
    Jeff W

    “PHOTOGRAPHY IS THE ‘JAZZ’ FOR THE EYES…”

    http://jwear.smugmug.com/
  • ZerodogZerodog Registered Users Posts: 1,480 Major grins
    edited June 11, 2012
    If you have a 70-200 you can get a canon d500 closeup lens. Killer macro setup.
  • EphTwoEightEphTwoEight Registered Users Posts: 552 Major grins
    edited June 12, 2012
    Zerodog wrote: »
    If you have a 70-200 you can get a canon d500 closeup lens. Killer macro setup.

    Intrigued? How close does it get? And any samples?
  • KingofthehillKingofthehill Registered Users Posts: 68 Big grins
    edited June 12, 2012
    I should of mentioned, i shoot with a Nikon
  • ZerodogZerodog Registered Users Posts: 1,480 Major grins
    edited June 13, 2012
    D500 canon closeup on a 80-200 2.8 f5.6 1/500 iso 800 155mm with a Nikon 300s.
    817487883_GwwLu-XL.jpg


    888471854_dFQVK-M.jpg

    200mm f10 1/400 iso 640

    Whenever I travel, I have this thing in my camera bag. It was $150 and fits any 77mm filter threads. I have used it with my 24-70 as well and it also works well.

    888472586_cW6qc-X3.jpg
  • Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited June 13, 2012
    Seymore wrote: »
    What wally is suggesting can work, but it's a hard lesson learned to find that the DOF is very narrow and quite limited. This is more like a super-macro and usually gives better than a 1:1 ratio, but the DOF is far <1/4"!

    The other option is longer FL lens and an extension ring. This will give you a long reach with a closer focus distance. Don't get me wrong... there is really no "good" way to get around a good macro lens. We're just telling you of other ways to use a "normal" lens for close(r)-up photography.


    IMO, you'd be happier with a true "macro" lens. Keep looking and good luck... <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/thumb.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" >
    Also what Wally recommended will not AUTO FOCUS... ... and that was a prerequisite for the lens... ...

    What do you consider a Budget Lens??? You see Budget is a very relative term..... budget lens for one person could be like buying a Lamborghini for another.....yes that is a bit extreme....
    If you have a decent prime lens or even short to med Zoom lens (17-55, 17-70, 24-70) a 3 ring macro tube set from KenKo would work well until you are ready to drop a few hundered or more on a true macro lens (90mm, 105mm, 180 or 200mm macro) and even with a true macro lens the extension tube set can be very helpful with really tiny subjects....

    Long ago I did the 3 macro filter set and found for me that they just sucked...but then I hated screwing on / off filters... ... ... they are cheap...


    Here is a very quick search on ebay for macro lenses then sorted out to used and for Nikon...... http://tinyurl.com/ctg84pg


    GoodLuck.
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • EphTwoEightEphTwoEight Registered Users Posts: 552 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    Zerodog wrote: »
    D500 canon closeup on a 80-200 2.8 f5.6 1/500 iso 800 155mm with a Nikon 300s.
    817487883_GwwLu-XL.jpg


    888471854_dFQVK-M.jpg

    200mm f10 1/400 iso 640

    Whenever I travel, I have this thing in my camera bag. It was $150 and fits any 77mm filter threads. I have used it with my 24-70 as well and it also works well.

    888472586_cW6qc-X3.jpg

    Fantastic images! I'm sold!
  • puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    Zerodog wrote: »
    If you have a 70-200 you can get a canon d500 closeup lens. Killer macro setup.

    Using a 70 -200 with a set of extension tubes also gives good performance - without adding any extra glass into the optical path ... tubes are probably similar price (these days) but will work on any compatible mounted lens ... and because they come in sets of 3, you can mix / match to suit requirements.

    Should you eventally get a 'proper' macro lens around 100mm, a full set used with one of these will give you about 2:1 ratio.

    pp
    Website

    Flickr
  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    heh.. i'm looking to get a macro myself..

    on the fence between 105 and 60 mm, though. opinions?
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    Foques wrote: »
    heh.. i'm looking to get a macro myself..

    on the fence between 105 and 60 mm, though. opinions?

    I prefer the longer focal lengths to give more room between glass and subject incase I need to use gear for lighting or I want room for safety reasons....like to shoot things that slither when I can... ....the shorter focal lengths are of course lighter and more compact.... Currently I use a Nikon 105 series E AIS + PN-11 tube (all manual focus) to achieve 1:1 (lifesize) magnification ... ... ... next Macro lens will be a 1:1 lens in the 150 - 200mm range for greater working distance... .... .... ...

    Lots of lenses, primes as well as zooms, designated as Macro are actually close up lenses giving a magnification of 1/2lifesize to 1/4 lifesize (1:2 to 1:4 magnification)....
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    hmm.. I was really hoping that a 60mm would suffice. I'll look into a longer micros, thank you.
    What would you say I need to create a higher magnification than 1:1?
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • Art ScottArt Scott Registered Users Posts: 8,959 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    Foques wrote: »
    hmm.. I was really hoping that a 60mm would suffice. I'll look into a longer micros, thank you.
    What would you say I need to create a higher magnification than 1:1?
    You're welcome. A lot of people love their 50-90mm macros ... ... I just never liked getting that close to my subjects, i started using macro for wedding work to shoot rings and such then the kiss and some other off the wall shots and just never liked getting right in my subjects face....so to speak.

    a set of kenko auto extension tubes...
    "Genuine Fractals was, is and will always be the best solution for enlarging digital photos." ....Vincent Versace ... ... COPYRIGHT YOUR WORK ONLINE ... ... My Website

  • FoquesFoques Registered Users Posts: 1,951 Major grins
    edited June 14, 2012
    To make sure that I understand, there aren't any lenses that give the higher magnification out of the box, correct? if I want to go higher than 1:1, I do need extension tubes, no way around it?
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • puzzledpaulpuzzledpaul Registered Users Posts: 1,621 Major grins
    edited June 15, 2012
    Foques wrote: »
    there aren't any lenses that give the higher magnification out of the box, correct? if I want to go higher than 1:1,

    Only Canon's mpe65 (afaik) > 1x to 5x.

    pp
    Website

    Flickr
Sign In or Register to comment.