Carl_Oxford_UK
Senior Member
OK, lets see if this newbie can use some of jargon in the right order to make it sound like I have some idea of what I am on about.
I have a D7100 and am looking to purchase a macro (or micro) lens to photograph fungi and lichen. I have read several comments that suggest when taking macro shots the more mm in the focal length the better as it is possible to shoot from further away and therefore avoid scaring any insects. However, with fungi and lichen this is not an issue and sometimes I need to get really close to the subject to get around rocks and branches and other bits of the landscape that would otherwise come between me and my subject. So, does this mean that I would be better off with a shorter focal length?
The Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - DX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses
or Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - FX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses for example, rather than a 105mm or 200mm?
Further, it is my understanding that the D7100 is a DX format, so a lens with 100mm focal length will actually act as if it is ~130mm. So to achieve the same effects as a 105mm lens I would only need a 80mm lens. Is this correct?
So what about when a lens has the letters DX in the description?
I notice that the Nikkor 85mm lens Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - DX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses says it gives the 35mm equivalent of 127mm, so if the lens does not have DX in the name will the focal length be the actual focal length?
Thanks in advance for any comments / suggestions
I have a D7100 and am looking to purchase a macro (or micro) lens to photograph fungi and lichen. I have read several comments that suggest when taking macro shots the more mm in the focal length the better as it is possible to shoot from further away and therefore avoid scaring any insects. However, with fungi and lichen this is not an issue and sometimes I need to get really close to the subject to get around rocks and branches and other bits of the landscape that would otherwise come between me and my subject. So, does this mean that I would be better off with a shorter focal length?
The Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - DX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses
or Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - FX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses for example, rather than a 105mm or 200mm?
Further, it is my understanding that the D7100 is a DX format, so a lens with 100mm focal length will actually act as if it is ~130mm. So to achieve the same effects as a 105mm lens I would only need a 80mm lens. Is this correct?
So what about when a lens has the letters DX in the description?
I notice that the Nikkor 85mm lens Nikon UK - NIKKOR Lenses - Auto Focus Lenses - DX Lenses - Single Focal Length - AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR - Digital Cameras, D-SLR, COOLPIX, NIKKOR Lenses says it gives the 35mm equivalent of 127mm, so if the lens does not have DX in the name will the focal length be the actual focal length?
Thanks in advance for any comments / suggestions