Quick lense question

[Pesty]

This is probably a silly question But I am getting a little confused by all the different types of lenses.

If a lense is described as 70-300 Macro and one is 70-300

Does the macro one work the same as the other on i.e a zoom lense but it also has the capabilty to take really close pics so more flexible?
or can it only take close pics so if I wanted to zoom in on a target far away it would be no good?

[paul911]

Pesty said:

Does the macro one work the same as the other on i.e a zoom lense but it also has the capabilty to take really close pics so more flexible?

Yes this one

[Pesty]

Thank you

Think I know what I'm looking for now. Wanted the capabilty to do close work as well

[Simpo Two]

What size do you want to fill the frame with? You might need a proper macro lens (they also make very good prime/portrait lenses).

[Pesty]

The only 'macro' shots I have taken are of watches.
I have taken some ok (for me not the standards on here )ones just using a simple point and click.

Not going to be taking magnified shots of really small stuff like insects etc etc like some of the great pics on here so a lense that will do both should suit me especially at the prices of these things. Most pics will be of far away stuff

I have wanted a DSLR for a while and now taken the plunge. I have ordered a book so that should prevent me from asking too many daft questions once it arrives (assuming I understand what the hell its on about the instruction manual is frying my brain )

[

Edited by Pesty on Monday 26th April 23:01

[4hero]

The lense I would go for, is a 100mm f2.8 if you are buying Canon.

[Pesty]

I have a D70s the main reason I started looking for zoom lenses was for taking pics birds in the back garden and cars at tracks etc etc.
I saw some marked as Macro thought they would do both jobs for me (i take a lot of watches)

It already has 18-70mm with it so my thinking was 70-300 would cover most things I need with two lenses with the added macro capability of the latter.

if I need to specialise later if I get serious I can. Is that sound thinking or am I way off?

Edited by Pesty on Monday 26th April 23:56

[RobDickinson]

Check the magnification of the zoom.

Will be 1:4 or 1:5 o something. A 'true' macro lens will giev you 1:1 ( 10mm item will be 10mm on the sensor).

It may be one company doesnt think 1:5 is good enough to be designated 'macro' when another does.

This is derived from the true focal length at MFD (not always the stated focal length max) , and the MFD.

You can always buy a cheap extension tube set for closer focusing for either lens or the kit lens, they work quite well especialy for something static like watches.

[Olivero]

Pesty said:

I have a D70s the main reason I started looking for zoom lenses was for taking pics birds in the back garden and cars at tracks etc etc.
I saw some marked as Macro thought they would do both jobs for me (i take a lot of watches)

It already has 18-70mm with it so my thinking was 70-300 would cover most things I need with two lenses with the added macro capability of the latter.

if I need to specialise later if I get serious I can. Is that sound thinking or am I way off?

Edited by Pesty on Monday 26th April 23:56

For macro you have two choices, either the 60mm Macro or the 105mm. These are the only Macro Lenses.
If you are thinking of shooting cars I would recommend the 80-200mm lens over the 70-300mm, much faster and much better. Use a mono-pod and manual focus.
You might want to think about the 14-55mm f2.8 lens. It is faster and sharper than what you are using.

[GetCarter]

Just to give you an idea, I just took this with the 105 macro (at full stretch). At 1:1 DOF is very narrow.

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 27th April 08:16

[Dogsey]

Olivero said:

Pesty said:

I have a D70s the main reason I started looking for zoom lenses was for taking pics birds in the back garden and cars at tracks etc etc.
I saw some marked as Macro thought they would do both jobs for me (i take a lot of watches)

It already has 18-70mm with it so my thinking was 70-300 would cover most things I need with two lenses with the added macro capability of the latter.

if I need to specialise later if I get serious I can. Is that sound thinking or am I way off?

Edited by Pesty on Monday 26th April 23:56

For macro you have two choices, either the 60mm Macro or the 105mm. These are the only Macro Lenses.
If you are thinking of shooting cars I would recommend the 80-200mm lens over the 70-300mm, much faster and much better. Use a mono-pod and manual focus.
You might want to think about the 14-55mm f2.8 lens. It is faster and sharper than what you are using.

I'm sorry but that's quite a lot of rubbish advice for a beginner.

There are considerably more options than just the 60mm & 105mm macro lenses, Sigma's 70mm EX and Tamron's 90mm are both astonishingly good and very well priced.

Yes the 80-200mm will be better (I'm assuming you mean the f2.8 version), but at a price. The 70-300mm will do just fine until he becomes better than the lenses deficences.

Not everyone can get on with, or needs a monopod. I hate them with a passion.

Manual focusing? For someone new to a DSLR? Please, he'll have enough to think about as it is! He'd do better to put it into continuous focusing mode (is it af-c on Nikon?).

14-55mm f2.8? Never heard of it. Do you mean 17-55mm f2.8? In which case yes it will be better, but again at a big price difference.

Phil, if you ever want to chat about anything you know where you can find me on a Friday night.

[Simpo Two]

Dogsey beat me to it, and with such similarity that I think we may be related...

To photograph watches without spending too much money I'd look for a s/h macro (proper 1:1 macro) lenses on eBay. The 'macro' suffix stuck onto some telephotos by kids in marketing departments is misleading.

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 27th April 09:25

[Dogsey]

Simpo Two said:

Dogsey beat me to it, and with such similarity that I think we may be related...

To photograph watches without spending too much money I'd look for a s/h macro (proper 1:1 macro) lenses on eBay. The 'macro' suffix stuck onto some telephotos by kids in marketing departments is misleading.

Edited by Simpo Two on Tuesday 27th April 09:25

Father? Is that you?

[RobDickinson]

OR save money and use an extension tube or two, watches dont move and you can control lighting.

[Pesty]

Thanks guys.

Yes as dogsy said above I am a pure beginer and this may all be a passing faze. Although I have always had an interest in photograpy I am not very artistic and I also have the attention span of a goldfish.

the lense I have found is 1:2 macro its going very cheap (so far)so it will be worth a punt I think.

[Eggle]

GetCarter said:

Just to give you an idea, I just took this with the 105 macro (at full stretch). At 1:1 DOF is very narrow.

Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 27th April 08:16

You're a bugger Carter.
Just as I thought I was sorted, you post things like this and I need to buy more kit

[Pesty]

Well I just recived the lense and tried taking a macro pic just to see if it works.

Holding camera in hand stood above watch on floor to get past the minimum focus length so may have been further away than needed. obviously this was just a quick test.


this is a crop of the below pic. GetCarter may I ask that macro pic above is that a crop of a larger image or is that how your lense takes the pic?

[GetCarter]

No, that's not a crop. That's a 105 at full stretch

[Pesty]

Thanks

[d1d215]

sounds like the Sigma 70-300mm MACRO @^ HG SIO AH@&^ (don't remmember the full name) . haven't touched it, but I've seen some very, very sharp images when stopped down just a bit. for that price - nothing can beat it.