Help a dad buy a lens for daughter's D40

[nelson_stehling1]

My daughter told me for Christmas she would like a lens for her D40 (6mp model). She wants a lens that she can

take up close photos - like of a leaf she said. Am I correct in assuming this would be a macro or prime lens? I

know the D40 requires certain type lenses to auto focus. Please suggest which would be best. She is a freshman

in college and is really enjoying her D40. I'm hoping to keep it under $200. Thanks, Nelson

[mark_sirota1]

The 60/2.8 AF-S Micro would be the natural choice, but it's well above $200.

 

In that budget, you need to go manual focus (which isn't that big a deal for close-up photography) or go to more cumbersome approaches like extension tubes (which go between the camera and her current lenses) or diopters (which screw in to the front of her current lenses). These approaches are effective and much less expensive than a dedicated macro lens, but more cumbersome in use and a little worse in image quality.

 

We'd need to know what current lenses she has to make more thorough recommendations.

[dcraton]

200.00 is a reasonable budget for a lens that will work with a D40 for auto focus and provide you with close up photos.

 

However, as Mark indicated, what lenses do she have now?

[travishoover]

What lens or lenses does she already have? Assuming she has the basic kit lens (18-55mm AF-S):

 

For a true macro lens, I would recommend the Nikon 60mm f/2.8 AF-S Micro. This lens will autofocus on the d40, and will magnify subjects at a life-size scale (meaning an object that is the same size as the image sensor will fill the entire frame). Unfortunately, it is also well outside your budget, at $499. I have this lens, and it is spectacular.

 

If you want a true macro lens, and don't mind buying her a used lens, you could look at the Nikon 55mm AIS Micro. A lot of people around here like it. It will not AF on the D40, but I believe it will meter. They can be had for just over $100 used. Check out keh.com, or robertsimaging.com, I know they have a couple in their used lens section right now. For close up shots, manual focus might be better for her, since she will be dealing with a very shallow depth of field. Of course, the viewfinder on the D40 doesn't make manual focusing very easy.

 

You might also look at a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 Macro HSM. Still a bit over your $200 budget, but can be had at amazon.com for $345. This lens will AF on her D40, and it can magnify subjects up to half of life-size, not too bad. Also would give her a slightly larger zoom range over the kit lens.

 

Another lens to consider, if she doesn't already have it, would be the Nikon 55-200mm AF-S VR, can be had for around $200-$250 pretty much anywhere. Not necessarily a close-up lens, but the longer zoom range can allow her to get in closer to subjects, and might give her the perspective she wants. I have seen some pretty good, fairly close-up shots of leaves and flowers done with this lens. This may be your best bet.

 

Of course, others will have different opinions. Good luck!

[nelson_stehling1]

She has the kit lens which I think was the 18-55. She has a fairly old film camera with manual focus so that may not be a big deal. Thanks, Nelson

[eric_arnold]

unfortunately, macro is one of the areas where the d40's inability to AF on lenses w/out an internal motor comes into play, as currently there are very few AF-s macro lenses. tamron is supposed to be releasing their excellent 90mm macro with a built-in motor, but i dont believe that's available yet.

 

for true macro work, manual focus is usually preferred, but if you also want to use the lens for portraits, it's nice to have the option to AF. macro lenses generally start around $300 and get really expensive at the longer focal lengths.

 

if you have a $200 limit, i'd suggest getting some extension tubes like these here: http://www.amazon.com/Pro-Optic-Extension-Exposure-Capabilities/dp/B0006UHQZQ/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1227216279&sr=1-2

 

she could get improved close-up performance from her current lens, or add a 50/1.8 for even sharper pics and still be under $200. she'll have to manual focus with the 50 --and use a tripod for optimal sharpness--but that combo should work.

[dcraton]

I have too many lenses. However, I second Travis' suggestion for the 55-200 VR II. I got a refurb'd one at B&H for a great price. With proper technique and a bit of experimenting, she can get very good results as Travis suggested. I paid under 200.00 for mine and it is the least expensive lens on my shelf by far.

 

However, and this may be applicable to your daughter, I use the lens for more than just "close up" photography. It makes a nice companion to her 18-55mm and will allow her some reach and flexibility for a variety of shooting applications.

 

I use this lens quite a bit on a D40x leaving the monsters and bazookas on the shelf for just tooling around and shooting for a day out hiking, fly fishing, or family gatherings.

 

It's a nice little lens and will fit your budget and needs as well as giving her some flexibility.

 

Good luck.

[craig_shearman1]

Just had a question like this yesterday. NEVER buy a photographer a lens, camera, etc., unless they are right there

with you to pick it out. We photographers are VERY specific about what we want. There are many, many models of

each type of lens and no two are exactly alike. No matter what a camera store salesman might tell you, there is no

such thing as "the same as." If you buy her a lens without her there to pick it out, there is a 99 percent chance it

won't be what she wanted. Then you're both in the awkward situation where either she tells you it's the wrong thing

and you have to take it back, or she tries not to hurt your feelings and keeps her mouth shut. In which case she'll

make do for a while, get frustrated, and eventually have to replace it and the money will have been wasted. I went

through this for many years as a teenage photographer whose relatives kept buying me stuff I couldn't use. I know

you're trying to do the right thing for your daughter, but trust me, Have her sit down at the computer with you and let

her pick what she wants. Or just let her order it and give her the $200.

[david.elliott]

If she doesnt mind manual focusing and not having metering abilities, you could get her a used 55mm f/2.8 or f/3.5 micro ai

/ ais lens for under $200.

[dcraton]

Or, buy it from a reputable dealer that allows returns. . .

[david.elliott]

Just a heads up -- AI and AIS lenses will not meter on a D40.

[ShunCheung]

Right, auto focus is not important for most macro work, but if you buy a Nikon manual-focus macro lens, you'll also lose metering. You might try to find a used AF-D macro lens; at least you'll have metering with the D40. Otherwise, to stay within budget, you need to find a 3rd-party lens or go with the 55-200.

[nelson_stehling1]

Thanks for the info. Keep it coming. Travis - I'll look at the Nikon's you suggested, the 55 might be a all around good option. I think the longer she stays with photography will dictate how much I spend on her accessories.

 

Craig - she is a freshman in college in another state so her and I sitting down at the same time won't happen soon enough. Thanks for the thoughts though. Nelson

[elliot1]

Another option other than a lens would be close up filters that screw onto the front of her existing lens. I own a set and they actually work quite well. And are very affordable. And you could still get her the 55-200mm lens suggested above which she would probably love to own. My suggestion is to stick with Nikon lenses over 3rd party lenses.

[joseph_wisniewski]

50mm f2.8 Sigma macros are $265. I don't know if they focus on D40. They definitely meter.

[Peter_in_PA]

The 55mm micro won't meter or auto-focus on my D50 either, and I find it perfectly use-able in full manual. She might, too.

It is probably my sharpest lens, and maybe my favorite. For still photos of things that don't move, like flowers and leaves,

it is just wonderful. Here's my favorite shot with it. No auto-focus, no metering, just trial and error and looking at the screen

till I got the exposure right.<div></div>

[shuo_zhao]

The AF-S 60 Micro-Nikkor is an excellent lens. It's the sharpest lens I've ever used (slightly sharper than the 50 f/1.8 at f/8), and its AF SWM works quickly and quietly. Although it's currently priced at $460, it's worth it if you want to get into macro. The fact that it will AF on the D40 should be a huge plus for her. At 60mm and f/2.8 it should also work well as a low light/portrait lens. (the kit lens is much slower at 55mm and f/5.6)

[steve_larese1]

This is really sweet of you :)

 

Eric had a good suggestion with the extension tubes -- you can go from half to more than life size, depending on the combination you use [think of a flashlight shown against a white wall. The closer you are, the tighter the circle. Pull back, and the circle of light gets bigger. Extension tubes just "pull back" the film (the wall), so the circle of light (the image) gets bigger].

 

I'm assuming she's wanting to do very close macro work (life size or even larger). For $200 maybe a nice 50 1.8 that is a fantastic low-light lens by itself, and a set of extension (also called macro) tubes, which will turn it into an extreme macro lens for cheap.

 

Others have mentioned macro filters (magnifying glasses in front of your lens, sharp in the center, softer toward the edges). There is also a reverse adapter that allows you to mount a lens backwards on your camera, or another lens. This provides extreme close ups.

 

If she is doing macro photography, she will need a good tripod (think Bogen or the like). This is an incredibly useful piece of equipment.

 

Good luck, she'll love whatever you do :)

[william_fournier]

Tamron 70-300mm LD Macro, I would think that would be a good option, cheap good performance for the money, and gives her some decent tele range as well. Not a true macro, but goes to 1:2 which is pretty close. $131 from amazon at the moment. Make sure you get the built in motor version for the D40.

[travishoover]

If I had to narrow down my suggestions to just one lens, I would go with the 55-200mm AF-S VR if I were you. The Sigma I suggested will not give her as much benefit. The 60mm AF-S micro is out of your budget, and the 55mm AIS will only work in manual, which she may not want to deal with. the 55-200mm VR will be the perfect companion to her kit lens. The VR will be very useful for handheld shots, and the zoom range will get her in tighter on subjects like leaves, etc. My father-in-law has it on his D40 all the time, and really likes it. You can get it for about $200 at Amazon. Then if you want a stocking stuffer, you can get her a close-up lens/filter set. There is a set of 3 from Tiffen that goes for around $50, it is 52mm in size, which is correct for both the 18-55 and the 55-200.

 

Good luck, I'm sure whatever you get her, she will love it. And if she doesn't, hopefully she can take it back!

[craig_shearman1]

Nelson, if she's not in town, at least ask her for the specific lens that she wants. If you have her go to www.bhphotovideo.com or www.adorama.com (the two biggest and most reputable camera stores), she can give you a stock number or at least the page URL. As you can see from all the recommendations here, there are many lenses that might get the job done but very difficult to know which one she will want. But good luck -- you're a great dad for doing this.

[lester_hawksby1]

AF isn't really all that important for very close up work; even cameras with excellent AF systems don't always do it satisfactorily. Not having metering, though, is difficult for most people.

 

The Nikon 60mm AF-S macro is nice but perhaps overkill. It's an excellent lens, but only slightly better than many other options and a lot more expensive. To my mind it represents so-so value for money.

 

The Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro is optically as good but not quite as well built as the Nikon 60. Unlike some cheap 3rd party lenses, the build quality is not at all bad; it is much better than the cheaper Nikon zooms! It will not autofocus on the d40, but is easy to manual focus (I used mine on the d40 a lot when I first got it - now it usually lives on another camera). It will meter fine, and the camera's modes work as normal, so it's still fairly easy to use. To my mind it represents good value for money.

 

The old Nikon 55mm AI macro is also optically excellent and superbly well made, but will neither autofocus nor meter on the d40; every automatic mode of the camera is disabled when it's mounted, and you get no feedback or exposure information at all. It is good value for money only to users who are happy to shoot and check the histogram and adjust and reshoot, every single time. This is easy when you're used to it but hard to adjust to; I'm happy to work this way, for some subjects, but many people find it offputting. If you're not sure your daughter is happy with this, it's probably not a good buy. If you are, it's good value for money.

[richard_bourgerie]

If you can afford $50 more, the new Tamron 18-200, f3.5-6.3 XR DI-II (built in motor), with auto-focusing and

macro capability might fill the bill. It's $249 from Adorama.

[andrewg_ny]

Similar to an earlier suggestion, the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF-D offers up

to 1:2 magnification within your budget and should fully function on your daughter's D40. Make sure you get the

version with built-in focus motor that will autofocus on the D40. As far as I know, Nikon's telephoto zooms

don't offer the higher magnification that the Tamron and Sigma do.

[bryan_lardizabal]

I suggest a Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AF, combined with a Nikon PK11A extension tube -- fantastic results for cheap!