Most effective ~$2000 upgrade

[luca_m.]

<p>I have a Sigma 150mm EX DG lens which I like, body is D40. One of the things I've resented about this setup has been the luminosity (or better the lack of it); also the lack of clarity of the D40 viewfinder. To have a few more buttons, on the camera, to not have to access the menu screen for so many functions, would also be nice. In spite of that, I have been often (well, sometimes) happy about pic quality.<br>

I have a few other lenses and of course take other kind of pictures than macro, but that is my main interest at this time. I mostly have non full frame lenses with one exception (300mm f4 AF-S). I am not sure if I should stick to small sensor bodies like D40? <br>

I am also curious about the lens... How is the SIgma 150 lens regarded here? Is there something a lot better out there, without breaking the bank? What kind of upgrade would you recommend for my situation? :)</p>

<p>Thanks,<br>

Luca</p>

[jeannean_.]

<p>I love my Sigma 150mm. It's a highly regarded macro lens on any forum (by many users), so there is really nothing a "lot better out there". Most macro lenses are good. I started with a D40, but soon felt the limitations (not sure what you mean by lack of luminosity), so moved to a D90. I've been very happy with that camera, but decided to get the D7000 a few months ago. I'm very happy with that camera too. I kept the D90 and like the combo of the D90 with the Sigma 150mm. Small sensor bodies are probably best for macro work IMO, so unless you have reasons for going to a full frame body other than macro, I'd stick to something like the D7000 (much lighter to handhold for field work). Macro work can be very challenging due to limited DOF, manually focusing on a tiny subject, effective diffused lighting, stabilization techniques (tripod, braces, bean bags), etc., so sometimes improving our skills and technique is more important than the cameras and lenses. I've seen some astounding macro work with advanced point and shoots, and some not so great work with the best equipment available. Since I've been in your shoes, I'd recommend getting a D7000 if you want to upgrade your camera.</p>

[kum03]

<p>For your stated budget, I would stick to the dx bodies. The D7000 seems to be the obvious choice, offering live view (take care of any small view finder problem), high pixel count and bonus video capability if needed.<br>

Good luck with your decision :)</p>

[Two23]

<p>the other advantage of DX such as D7000 is with DX you gain 1 more stop of DoF vs. FX. How about a D7000 and a pair of Nikon macro flash?</p>

<p>Kent in Sd </p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>keep the 150, it's good glass. the d40 is your weakest point. a d7000 would be reasonably future proof and would be an upgrade in almost every significant area. since you can get the body for $1100 USD, i'd put the remaining $900 into ring lights and/or stabilization.</p>

[dbcooper]

<blockquote>

<p>I am not sure if I should stick to small sensor bodies like D40?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, since at your budget, buying a full frame camera would exclude any more full-frame lenses than you already have. OTOH, if you buy a D7000 body, you'll have budget left over for a lens, or better yet, some lighting (also important for macro)...like Kent said, maybe a Nikon R1C1 kit. I can tell you from experience both the D7k and R1C1 are worth having. Another option would be to get a decent macro rail for shooting stacked images.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How is the SIgma 150 lens regarded here?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Very well regarded, and rightly so. If you get another body, you'll probably want to keep that particular lens.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Is there something a lot better out there, without breaking the bank?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Probably not (without breaking the bank, that is). Zeiss has a nice 100mm macro lens, Nikon's 200 micro is very nice, and there are some others that aren't common, but they can be pricey. I went with the Tamron 180mm macro myself. It was a little cheaper than the 150 Siggie, and it doesn't have VR/IS/OS, but I shoot macro from a tripod so that didn't matter to me. Don't know if it's got better IQ or not, but it suits me. I wanted a little more working distance so I went for a little longer focal length. I'm very happy with it. If it ever got stolen or damaged I'd consider getting a 150 Sigma though.</p>

<p>I shoot either a D7k or a D700 with the 180 Tammy on a RRS B150B macro rail, and a shutter release. When I shoot flash it's usually with the R1C1 kit, but sometimes I use an SB900 (or two) off-camera with a small soft box or a cobbled-up diffuser. </p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

 

[luca_m.]

<p>Thanks everyone for the advice. It sound as though a D7000 is the way to go. I hope the viewfinder in the D7000 is a little 'brighter' than the one in my D40. I've just turned 50 and my eyes are not getting any better with age, surprise! That is what I was trying to say by 'luminosity', sorry, poorly worded. May I ask which flash or ring light would you recommend for D7000/Sigma 150? Had a look online there are hundreds of options...</p>

 

[CvhKaar]

<p>I hope the viewfinder in the D7000 is a little 'brighter' than the one in my D40.</p>

<p>For macro, especially on a tripod, i find using LiveView is so much more effective...<br>

In liveview you can zoom in on your subject ( on my D300/s) 4 times the real life size allowing you to focus exactly on the parts of your subject you want to get sharp..<br>

Do not use AF for this, but move ytour camera to focus , on a foccussing rail. if you do not have one, this is one of the best investments if you seriously want to get into macro work...</p>

<p> </p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Viewfinder in the D7000 is a huge step up from the D40 - it'll be a relief!</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

<p>+1 to sticking with the DX format and going for a D7000. Macro and telephoto work are where smaller formats shine because of their greater depth of field, and any given reproduction-ratio gets you a smaller subject field with a consequently greater magnification in the final image.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>macro in live view is outstanding, btw... that will be a VERY helpful upgrade for you.</p>

[carl_becker2]

<p>Since you have mostly DX glass upgrading the body makes more sense. Look at the D7000. Much better view finder, control features plus menu system. Way under your budget which is a good plus.</p>

[jeannean_.]

<p>"which flash or ring light would you recommend for D7000/Sigma 150?"<br>

DB Cooper uses what I would recommend for the Sigma 150: "When I shoot flash it's usually with the R1C1 kit, but sometimes I use an SB900 (or two) off-camera with a small soft box or a cobbled-up diffuser." To give you an idea of the MANY ways people shoot with flash, here's a great thread with tons of pictures. Also note how many of these macro shooters use a Sigma 150:<br>

<br /><br>

<a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/780820/0">http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/780820/0</a><br>

<br /></p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The D7000 is the nicest camera body imaginable for macro work, if that's what you do. The live view is fantastic and so is the detail at base ISO and slightly higher.</p>

<p>However, depth of field is about the same between different formats if you aim at the same image quality level. With an FX camera you can always stop down a bit more (to get the same DOF) and increase ISO to keep shutter speed in check (to compensate for the smaller aperture) and the end result has about the same SNR and quality level. On a DX camera like the D7000 you have to be at or near the optimal aperture to get a high quality image whereas with an FX camera you have a bit more leeway in the range of apertures that give high quality results. For example the D7000 showed prolific amounts of chromatic aberrations with the 200mm Micro at 1:1 wide open, in an extent which I'd never seen before on any lens. Stop down to f/8 or f/11 and it's great though, but there's not much control left. Which is one reason why I prefer to use the 85 PC-E whenever I can.</p>

 

[evannorth]

<p>i use the d7000, metz ms 15 macro flash and sigma 150mm, sometimes with the sigma 1.4 converter. this set up works really well for me.</p>