# camera lens suggestions???



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Hey there folks. I just bought a Nikon D3000 with the Nikon 18-55 VR lens and also purchased the Nikon 55-200 VR lens. I am looking for suggestions on a lens for great close up shots. Looking to take photos of my fish, shrimp, and crested geckos. Also other outdoor close ups. What would you suggest?


----------



## Digital (Apr 4, 2008)

Get a macro lens if you're looking for a up close type of shot...

I've done pretty well with my 17-50mm tamron lens.

Pics can be seen here http://fish.ic3d.net/90/4-27-10/


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Very nice photos IC3D.


----------



## Digital (Apr 4, 2008)

jeepn4x4 said:


> Very nice photos IC3D.


Thank you! roud:


----------



## Centromochlus (May 19, 2008)

The D3000 is a great camera. I got mine about 2 months ago.

In addition to the lens it came with, i have an AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED lens (whatever that means, LOL). It's great for close up shots, but doesn't do that well with aquariums. There's probably better lens out there for aquarium shots.

Here's a few pictures i took at the Zoo yesterday with the close-up lens:


----------



## williamsonaaron (Jan 27, 2010)

I have a nikon d-80 I would suggest a prime lens like the 50mm its super affordable and is fantastic for close ups, sharpness and shooting in low light conditions. at wide open you get f1.4.


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Sweet photos Az. I also got that same lens except its the VR version which adds vibration reduction to the lens.


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Something like this? http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-50mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00005LEN4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1272764871&sr=1-1


----------



## legomaniac89 (Mar 16, 2008)

I shoot with a Canon, but I have the 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens and I absolutely love it. It takes awesome closeups and works great as an all-purpose lens too. I believe Nikon makes an 85mm prime lens (which is pretty similar to the 100mm).


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Thanks for the input lego.


----------



## patrock (Feb 21, 2008)

Nikon makes a 105MM macro that is an awesome lens for macro and portraits, it’s a prime lens and is not cheep. I got mine last year for $700-800, and I rarely take it off the camera anymore. I cannot get back far enough to get a FTS so it does get swapped once in a while.
Nikon did just come out with an 85MM macro that looks like it can rival the 105 and at a cheaper price tag. Personally, if I had a d3000, I wouldn’t go with anything but the 105MM for macro shots. 
As an aside (slightly OT) what are you using for flash/lighting? For macro shots lighting important

I looked at the 55-200 VR and looks like a good all around lens, maybe I need to get one now:icon_bigg
HTH


----------



## peccavi (May 5, 2010)

*Finally I have an answer.*

I've been reading this forum for a while now, and finally a question comes up that I can answer. 

First off let me say once I started using prime lenses I NEVER use my telephoto any more. They simply can't compete with the sharpness of a prime lens. Also, there are programs out there (like CombineZM) which will combine multiple pictures and give you one amazing crisp picture that will make your friends jealous... but you'll never get a fish to stand still long enough to use it.

I bought a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR about a year or so ago and I use it for just about everything. It does GREAT for everything from macro to portraits and sports. I use it on both my D200 and D700. 










But thats just my opinion.

--- EDIT ---


AzFishKid said:


> f/4-5.6G ED lens (whatever that means, LOL)


This is a measurement of how much light gets past the lens to the sensor. My understanding is 1 would be 100% so 4 is about 25%? The lower the number the better (unless your shooting long exposures and want a very small amount of light).

--- EDIT 2 ---

I also have a 50mm 1.4, and it is in my opinion the best lens I own... but I never use it for my aquarium, it simply doesn't get the pictures I want. It could work for you though if you want a wide picture not a close up.










--- EDIT 3 ---

Ok I had to look it up cuz it was burning a hole in my brain.

The photography term "one f-stop" refers to a factor of √2 (approx. 1.41) change in f-number, which in turn corresponds to a factor of 2 change in light intensity. The aperture is proportional to the square root of accepted light, and thus inversely proportional to the square root of required exposure time, such that an aperture of f/2 allows for exposure times one quarter that of f/4. 

Also (the part I did know) the smaller the hole (larger aperture) the more depth of focus you will get, and the larger hole (smaller apertrue number) the more you get that out of focus effect on the background of things your shooting.


----------



## peccavi (May 5, 2010)

deleted (or I tried anyway)


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

Yeah, I really want the Nikkor 105 macro. Yummy!


----------



## -MJ- (Apr 2, 2010)

I'm a canon guy and i think nikon has these too, but you can save money by getting some set of extension/macro tubes and using it on your 55-200. Its a cheap buy/introduction and you can decide if you want to fully get into macro. 

There are expensive ones with Autofocus (150.00+), but in reality you are going to manual focus and use live view everything since dof is pretty slim. So I would suggest you get the non-autofocus ones. Its only like 10 dollars.

Nikon Extension tube: http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.12458

I use extension tubes on my 50mm and get pretty good results. 
My macro flickr set: http://www.flickr.com/photos/markjpacheco/sets/72157622401987896/


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Peccavi-great first answer. Super informative thank a bunch. That 105mm lens sounds sweet but a little out of the budget for now.

-MJ-thank for the link to the tubes. I never heard of them before. I am going to order one give it a shot. Thanks.


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

Another option are the Nikon "macro filters". They basically halve the focal distance on your zoom lens and have high quality optics unlike the junk ones. have one and it's pretty good. Like $30-40


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

Thanks for the heads up macclellan. Do you think these work better than the extension tubes? I am going to try some of these cheaper alternatives and see how I do. Then I think I will look into the 85mm or 105mm.


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

Depends on what you mean by "better." I believe the advantages are that you don't have the light loss and preserve autofocus, but I could be wrong. I do remember that when I compared the two, I went with the filter (diopter I think they're called), most are crap but the Nikon one is supposed to be really good. Mine's a Nikon 5T. Got it on ebay. Actually, it's good enough that I've put off a proper macro lens for several years. I'm using a good tripod mind you.


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

macclellan do you have a link to one of these filters that you could share with me? I looked on ebay but I am not to sure what I am looking for.


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

After some searching, Nikon has discontinued these, so it looks they are hard find. 
It's the Nikon 5T and 6T close up filter / diopter I was speaking of though.

This is what I was talking about though: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/318218


----------



## jmhart (Mar 14, 2008)

patrock said:


> Nikon makes a 105MM macro that is an awesome lens for macro and portraits, it’s a prime lens and is not cheep. I got mine last year for $700-800, and I rarely take it off the camera anymore. I cannot get back far enough to get a FTS so it does get swapped once in a while.
> Nikon did just come out with an 85MM macro that looks like it can rival the 105 and at a cheaper price tag. Personally, if I had a d3000, I wouldn’t go with anything but the 105MM for macro shots.
> As an aside (slightly OT) what are you using for flash/lighting? For macro shots lighting important
> 
> ...





macclellan said:


> Yeah, I really want the Nikkor 105 macro. Yummy!




I've got a D200 and that's what I have for macro shots, and it is definitely yummy. My camera budget was stout, but decidedly fixed, so I picked up the D200, 105mm VR, 18-200mm VR(AWESOME), SB800, and an SB600 about 18 months ago. Took advantage of that Microsoft Live/Bing cash back thin when they were rebating 30% of ebay purchases...yeah, it was awesome.


The 18-200mm is really fantastic. It's seriously the PERFECT around town lens. So nice not to have to switch lens.


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

So far I found one. Seems a bit steep in the price. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0000AE6CY/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&qid=1273236999&sr=8-1&condition=used


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

Yeah, that's way too expensive. I paid $40 shipped.


----------



## jmhart (Mar 14, 2008)

macclellan said:


> Yeah, that's way too expensive. I paid $40 shipped.


But now it's "vintage"


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

hah.


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

vintage does = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## jeepn4x4 (Jan 27, 2008)

I am finding a lot of Nikon no. 0,1,2 close up lens but no others yet


----------



## macclellan (Dec 22, 2006)

Here's a shot with the 5T on a 'vintage' Nikkor 70-210mm lens and 'classic' D70 to give you an idea of magnification and sharpness. Not bad for little $:


----------

