amir_most Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>Hi,<br> I’ve had the Nikon D3000 for about a month and I’ve done wonders with the kit lens. Its seems to be a good lens but it limits me sometimes when I’m doing macro photography.<br> I am looking for a macro lens and have a budget of $550 since I’m kinda new to photography but experienced. I’ve had my eye on the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC HSM Macro Lens for Nikon DSLR (not sure if this is works on the D3000) and I was thinking of buying this. Of course before buying this lens I should ask advice from more experienced photographers.<br> My basic use for the lens would be macro photography but a lens that will also be able to take landscape, scenery and nature shots on occasion since I will be traveling this summer. I was also recommended the Nikon 60mm macro but I was not too sure about if being a good lens for the occasional landscape and scenery sohts.Does have any specific lens that you would recommend me or is the Sigma lens good? Thanks</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>the sigma will AF on your d3000, but you dont need AF for macro. also the sigma is a little shy of 1:2 macro. for 1:1 get the nikon 60 or tamron 90.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dale_maribao Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>I have the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro for my D5000. My sharpest lens. Got it for $590 from ebay. Brand new is $730. Try the Tamron 90. It has very good reviews too. It's fairly priced below $400.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philip_tam Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>The D3000 kit lens actually does ok as a macro lens, and the Sigma 17-70mm probably won't do significantly better. The only lenses that'll do much better are macro primes. Your kit lens is decent as a scenery/landscape lens. 18mm is quite wide, and for landscapes you tend to stop down anyways.</p> <p>The Nikon 60mm f/2.8 and the Tamron 90mm (make sure it's the one that autofocuses on the D3000) are good choices. They can be used as portrait lenses too (60mm especially) but it can't be a goofy focal length to work with for landscapes.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_becker2 Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>You would probably be better off keeping your kit lens for general and landscape photography and use your budget on a dedicated macro lens of the focal length required. Generally speaking one lens can not do all, when you want to do something special get the proper lens for that endeavor.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_becker2 Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>You would probably be better off keeping your kit lens for general and landscape photography and use your budget on a dedicated macro lens of the focal length required. Generally speaking one lens can not do all, when you want to do something special get the proper lens for that endeavor.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted_raper1 Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>Agree with Carl. Keep the kit lens for general stuff, and use your budget for a dedicated macro lens. The Tamron 90 2.8, and the Nikon 60 and 105 (you may have to go used for the Nikon gear in your price range). I always prefer a prime for macro use.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray_rg Posted May 19, 2010 Share Posted May 19, 2010 <p>I agree with other recommendations ... buy a prime macro lens like Nikon 60mm, Tamron 90mm, Sigma 105mm, or Nikon 105mm based on your usage. There are few more macro lens with longer focal length but could go beyond your budget.</p> <p>I have Tamron 90mm and it's a nice little light weight lens. It's really good for portrait too... with creamy bokeah and kind of mid-tele lens on DX.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_drutz Posted May 20, 2010 Share Posted May 20, 2010 <p>There is a difference between a lens that calls itself a macro zoom and a true macro lens. Are you sure that you need a macro lens and not just a zoom lens that focuses close? A true macro lens can produce a 1:1 image. Do you need that or something close to that? There are also less expensive alternatives to a macro lens. There are close-up lenses that are more like filter size lenses that screw onto the front of your existing lens and there are extension tubes that go between the lens and the camera. You might be better off getting one of them and putting the bulk of the money into a lens more suited to your other needs. A good set of close-up lenses can cost as little as $70-80.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric_arnold Posted May 22, 2010 Share Posted May 22, 2010 <p>amir, the advantage of the sigma is that it does almost 1:2 macro and it zooms. a dedicated macro will be a fix-focal lens and will do 1:1 macro.</p> <p>the kit lens is just shy of 1:3 macro, the OS version of the sigma is 1:2:7 (the older version is 1:2:3). IMO you are better off keeping the kit and getting a dedicated macro. the tamron 90 is about the same price as the sigma.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now