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
General Lenses
Macro
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="kiwi314" data-source="post: 561067" data-attributes="member: 41175"><p>Hello all! I am looking to buy a lens with macro capability, primarily because we are expecting a baby and I want to be able to take close ups of it's lips, fingers, etc.</p><p></p><p>I use a Nikon <strong>D750</strong> (full frame) and my lenses are as follows:</p><p><strong>28mm</strong> 1.8 G (Favorite, and probably most used.)</p><p><strong>50mm</strong> 1.8 G (Like this one as well, but the wider 28 seems to be convenient more often. Used as portrait lens, but would like one better suited.)</p><p><strong>70-300</strong> 4-5.6 G (Use this a fair amount, but would really like to replace with better telephoto.)</p><p><strong>28-80</strong> 3-5.6 G (Haven't used this one, it's not even worth it when I have the 28 & 50.)</p><p></p><p>My husband and I do a lot of traveling, hiking and camping, which finds me grabbing the 28mm the most to capture the scenes. Often I'll keep the 70-300 along for the ride, in case I need to grab a telephoto shot, but it is a poor lens and I would really like to upgrade. But because we are expecting a baby in 2017, I am thinking maybe a macro should come first. My budget is flexible, but obviously the lower price the better. But if it is combo telephoto and macro, i'd be willing to spend more. But I don't want to sacrifice quality zoom just because it may have macro, either. I also would like a better lens for portraits eventually.</p><p></p><p>I am interested in the <strong>105mm</strong> 2.8 - both Nikon (IF-ED) and Sigma's models seem to be good lenses. Which would you say is better? I like the ability they have to focus at close distances, as I imagine I will be doing a lot of simply standing over baby to grab close ups. The other primary uses for macro would probably be food and random items.</p><p></p><p>I am thinking the 105mm would be good because of <strong>macro</strong>, decent <strong>portrait</strong> lens (right?), and mild <strong>telephoto</strong>, all of which I am in need of. What do you think? Is there a different lens you recommend? Or a combination of lenses?</p><p></p><p>Thanks for the input!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="kiwi314, post: 561067, member: 41175"] Hello all! I am looking to buy a lens with macro capability, primarily because we are expecting a baby and I want to be able to take close ups of it's lips, fingers, etc. I use a Nikon [B]D750[/B] (full frame) and my lenses are as follows: [B]28mm[/B] 1.8 G (Favorite, and probably most used.) [B]50mm[/B] 1.8 G (Like this one as well, but the wider 28 seems to be convenient more often. Used as portrait lens, but would like one better suited.) [B]70-300[/B] 4-5.6 G (Use this a fair amount, but would really like to replace with better telephoto.) [B]28-80[/B] 3-5.6 G (Haven't used this one, it's not even worth it when I have the 28 & 50.) My husband and I do a lot of traveling, hiking and camping, which finds me grabbing the 28mm the most to capture the scenes. Often I'll keep the 70-300 along for the ride, in case I need to grab a telephoto shot, but it is a poor lens and I would really like to upgrade. But because we are expecting a baby in 2017, I am thinking maybe a macro should come first. My budget is flexible, but obviously the lower price the better. But if it is combo telephoto and macro, i'd be willing to spend more. But I don't want to sacrifice quality zoom just because it may have macro, either. I also would like a better lens for portraits eventually. I am interested in the [B]105mm[/B] 2.8 - both Nikon (IF-ED) and Sigma's models seem to be good lenses. Which would you say is better? I like the ability they have to focus at close distances, as I imagine I will be doing a lot of simply standing over baby to grab close ups. The other primary uses for macro would probably be food and random items. I am thinking the 105mm would be good because of [B]macro[/B], decent [B]portrait[/B] lens (right?), and mild [B]telephoto[/B], all of which I am in need of. What do you think? Is there a different lens you recommend? Or a combination of lenses? Thanks for the input! [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
General Lenses
Macro
Top