CONFUSED BEGINNER

Like most specialty lenses they don't make good jack of all trades. The 55 micro is a GREAT macro lens, but too short for good portrait work.

- Not on a DX camera surely?

It has about the same angle of view as an 85mm lens on full-frame, and that's considered a classic portrait focal length.

 

Besides, perspective is a function of subject distance, not lens focal length. So it depends whether you're shooting tight head, head & shoulders, half-length or whatever.

Edited July 26, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

Actually subject distance for a given size subject is dependent on angle of view & so focal length is indirectly involved. You're right about the smaller CCD though I forgot the Nikon was a 23.5 mm x 15.6 mm one. I think he specified retaining auto focus though?

 

The point here is that he admits to being a beginner who is already confused. Perhaps some of the high end (macro bellows & so on) ideas although very versatile are a bit beyond the ken with things like manual focus, bellows extension exposure compensation & so on?

 

One reason why I suggested a short zoom with a macro ability is simplicity of operation for someone at his experience level!

"..bellows extension exposure compensation & so on?"

-TTL metering will take care of that, but unfortunately the D5200 won't meter with anything but AF lenses I believe. So agreed that although a 55mm Micro-Nikkor has a suitable focal length, it's not really practical otherwise.

 

The 60mm AF macro Nikkor fits the bill though. Or as next best option, a set of auto extension tubes.

 

So called "macro" zooms are nothing more than close focussing, and rarely give enough magnification to class as anything like a real macro lens.

 

There's nothing I can think of that will replace the range of a kit zoom and allow true macro focussing without carrying an accessory of some sort. At some point the lens will need to be removed and be replaced with another lens or extension tube. - No such thing as a free lunch.

 

Sticking a magnifying glass - AKA close up diopter - in front of a kit zoom isn't going to get close to true macro, and won't give decent image quality either.

 

"Likewise, rings won't work because rings that pass the signals needed to work with AF-S and G lenses are rare and far more expensive."

- I very easily found a 'Kooka' branded set of extension tubes at a reasonable price with full pass-through AF contacts plus mechanical AF and aperture control.

Edited July 26, 2017 by rodeo_joe|1

I disagree.

He didn't ask for 1:1 just "close up of flowers".

The high end stuff is fine for us with all the experience, but its too much for a confused beginner in my mind. Same with tubes & other stuff.

My 2 macro capable lenses are nothing like you describe "are nothing more than close focussing, and rarely give enough magnification to class as anything like a real macro lens." They actually change internal configuration for macro, which still allows the full zoom range to be used & keeps auto-focus, or Super macro which locks you into w/a only, but keeps a/f.

 

Normal: Wide angle: Approx. 40cm/1.3 ft. to infinity

Telephoto: Approx. 2.0m/6.6 ft. to infinity

Macro: Wide angle: Approx. 10cm - 3m/3.9 in.- 9.8 ft.

Telephoto: Approx. 90cm - 3m/3.0 ft.- 9.8 ft.

Super Macro: Approx. 1cm -1m/0.4 in.- 3.3 ft.(Wide angle only).

This translates into single sub 1" blossoms, pretty much meeting his requirements.

Both of these are under 1" across, which seems to cover his original requirements nicely without all the extra "stuff" to confuse him even more!