Should I get a macro lense?

[jose_rivera9]

I shot this with my d50 with the 55-200mm kit lense. I am thinking of

purchasing a macro lense but am looking at other type lenses.

 

1st, please critique photo

 

2nd, please advise lense

 

I now use a nikon d80 with sigma 17-50, 2.8 and 50mm 1.4<div></div>

[jose_rivera9]

Please critique photo and then advise

[Matt Laur]

Jose: It's a little easier on the people you'd like to see that image, and on the storage/bandwidth used, if you scale an image like that down some for online viewing.

 

As for whether or not you need a macro lens... what is your intended use? You'r asking your question in the weddings/social events area. Do you see yourself using it somehow in that context? Or are you more inclined towards natural subjects? (in which case, definitely bring this issue up in the nature forum, where you'll get lots of good info)

[robbie_caswell]

If you have all of your other bases covered.... Backup body, multiple flashes, zooms, primes, 25gigs of cards, software, computers, sample albums, insurance, wedsite, among other things... then maybe if the money was burning a hole in my pocket.

 

Even then, I think my answer would be no... for me it would be a waste of money.

[colinsouthern]

Consider one of the Canon cluse up adaptors - I understand that they work with Nikon lenses as well.

 

Why did you post this in the WEDDING forum?

 

Cheers,

[steve_c.5]

The lenses you select must fit the subjects you shoot the most. For us who shoot weddings, portraits, and other subjects, we need a wide variety of lenses.

 

If you need a great macro lens to shoot wedding rings and other tight details, a fixed macro may be just the ticket. I have the Sigma 70mm f2.8. It's not only a great portrait lens (reviews have called it near flawless), it can get down very tight on small subjects like rings. It's about $400.

 

Your existing kit lens, while not bad, is probably not what you will stick with for pro work. If you shoot in low light, you will want faster glass, such as f1.4, f1.8, or certainly nothing slower than f2.8. You can use such lenses in churches, stage shows, and other low-light venues very effectively without flash (just jack up the ISO, some de-noising may be required).

 

Again, base it on what you shoot most.

[ned1]

Before you even THINK about a macro take a look at what you will need to fill out your lens kit to the point it can cover 95% of the usual wedding images. You have no long lenses. You need them both for portrait work and for those times when the church won't let you near the alter (it happens). At the very least you should get an 85 1.8. If you can afford it get an 85 1.4 or a 70-200 VR (I use the latter, but it is HEAVY and very expensive).

 

At that point you'll have a complete kit with all the basics. Possible lenses after that would be a 35 2.0 or a Sigma 30 1.4 if you want to shoot the reception with a single fast lens. Some well-heeled photographers add a fisheye for a single wow image inside the church. A macro is probably the last lens you should consider purchasing.

[wedding-photography-denver]

What do you intend to do with this lens? Are you shooting weddings and need a detail lens?

 

If you are indeed using it for wedding details, you might consider a pocketable P&S which can also serve as an emergency cam. Fuji do pretty decent with their f50fd at the moment or the canon g9 which offers raw too.