Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Prime
60mm 2.8 Micro
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 324712" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>The 60mm is an excellent lens. I have the older D version, the newer one is said to be even better. </p><p></p><p>And I also have the 105mm VR macro. People get hung up thinking it is the only choice, because for 1:1 shots of bugs, the 105mm has advantage of having about six inches working distance in front of lens at 1:1, where the 60mm is a bit less than three inches in front. Which works of course, but it can interfere with lighting, or scare a bug, etc. The 105 is nice at 1:1.</p><p></p><p>But you said still life and product work, which suggests maybe 3 feet, and the tables turn. Then the 105mm is telephoto, and thus has to be nearly double that distance, which becomes awkward. Room space may not even be that large, and you can no longer reach both subject and camera at same time. FX minimizes that, but it's a bear with DX.</p><p></p><p>In the same way that the shorter lens is also best for copy stand work, because the copy stand will not be tall enough to use the 105. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 324712, member: 12496"] The 60mm is an excellent lens. I have the older D version, the newer one is said to be even better. And I also have the 105mm VR macro. People get hung up thinking it is the only choice, because for 1:1 shots of bugs, the 105mm has advantage of having about six inches working distance in front of lens at 1:1, where the 60mm is a bit less than three inches in front. Which works of course, but it can interfere with lighting, or scare a bug, etc. The 105 is nice at 1:1. But you said still life and product work, which suggests maybe 3 feet, and the tables turn. Then the 105mm is telephoto, and thus has to be nearly double that distance, which becomes awkward. Room space may not even be that large, and you can no longer reach both subject and camera at same time. FX minimizes that, but it's a bear with DX. In the same way that the shorter lens is also best for copy stand work, because the copy stand will not be tall enough to use the 105. :) [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Prime
60mm 2.8 Micro
Top