Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
October 31, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 22

Help with lens choice needed

:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Oct 31, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Hello everyone!

I am still an amateur, learning photographer but I am trying to expand further and try new possibilities.
I currently own a Nikon D5000 camera which I love ^^ . But I would like to purchase a new lens, which would enable me to take close-up pictures with very shallow depth of field and as well as for portrait pictures.
My current choices are Nikon 50mm/1.8 , 35mm/1.8 and Nikkor 40mm/2.8 Micro. However, I am very stuck with my choice right now, as I am not sure which lens exactly will fit what I am looking for. What I want in the end, is something like this: [link] But after all the reviews and videos I read and saw, I am just too confused.
Also, perhaps there are any other lenses which I overlooked that can help me with what I want?

Thank you all for the help in advance. :)
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconolda-g:
Olda-G Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
The Nikon 50mm f1.8 G AG-S is a great lens and a real bargain. The other lenses are also very good for the price, but the 50mm will do more to accomplish shallow depth of field. It also is the only one of the three that will be compatible with full frame Nikons if you ever decide to upgrade in that direction. Others to consider are the 60mm f2.8 Micro G, and the 85mm f1.8 G. They are somewhat more expensive, but they will be better at getting a shallow depth of field.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 3, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks :)
But is there a big difference in taking portrait pictures with 50mm and the 60mm macro? I assume 50mm is more made for portait pictures, but is there actually a big significance? Because I love the 60mm macro due to easy and amazing close-up pictures, but how well would it work with portraits? Is there a reason to purchase 60mm and then 50mm as well? Or would 60mm be sufficient enough?
Sorry for tons of questions, I just have problems deciding. ^^;
Reply
:iconolda-g:
Olda-G Featured By Owner Nov 3, 2012  Hobbyist Photographer
Lenses are compromises. The 60mm macro gives you better close-up ability and on the D5000 it has a field of view equivalent to 90mm on a full-frame which is close to the classic focal distance for portraits. The macro capability makes it more expensive and it is slower (f2.8 vs f1.8). It's a great general purpose lens but for actual macro shooting most people prefer something around 100mm focal length to give you more working distance between camera and subject. The 50 is probably the logical choice for a first prime lens and it is a great performer.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 3, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
This is very helpful. ^^ Thanks a lot! :)
Reply
:iconsjphoto:
sjphoto Featured By Owner Nov 3, 2012  Professional Photographer
That lens. Get it. For the price, you CANNOT go wrong. I don't own a Nikon, but if I did, that would be my first lens. 50mm is my bread and butter. Mine is a Zeiss f/1.4, which cost my a pretty penny. But seriously, I would shoot on that 1.8 any day. My Zeiss was worth it, every single penny, but for someone who's only an armature that is an EXCELLENT choice.
Reply
:iconwildsidesky:
WildsideSky Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012  Student Photographer
[link]
go with the 50mil
it's universal.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks ^^ That's very helpful.
Reply
:iconwildsidesky:
WildsideSky Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Student Photographer
i love mine x3
Reply
:iconliveto-inspire:
liveto-inspire Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012
If it's any help I have the 50mm and adore it - use it all the time! And it's not too pricey either ^_^
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks. Yes, indeed the price is good. So even if in the end I realise I want something different, this lens can be a good choice to see what I want. :) Do you mainly use it for portraits? Oh, one more question. With this lens, can you focus very close? Like, around a finger-width distance from object.
Reply
:iconliveto-inspire:
liveto-inspire Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012
Yeah exactly! Its the cheapest lens i think but works wonders! yes i do mainly use it for portraits, but it often stays on my camera so if i'm shooting landscape i'll use it too. yes, veryyyy close! that's what i love about it, you can get amazing depth of field :)
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Sweet! ^^
Reply
:iconliveto-inspire:
liveto-inspire Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012
^-^
Reply
:iconrcooper102:
rcooper102 Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012
The lenses you are looking at are all very short focal length so you will have a VERy close working distance to fill the frame which can be a tremendous pain. I am also unsure how close they focus so you might even need an extension tube on top of that to make them work for what you want.

Instead I suggest looking into a longer focal length macro lens. For example Tokina's 100mm F2.8 macro will give you much more breathing room and also allow you to focus much closer in on your subject than a shorter one would.

Also don't worry too much about the maximum aperture, you won't be shooting wide open anyway or your depth of field will be so tiny that it will be impossible to get any detail.

For example, the 100mm F2.8 has the following depth of fields when focused on a subject 10cm away:

F2.8 : 0.009 mm
F4.0 : 0.014 mm
F5.6 : 0.016 mm
F8.0 : 0.028 mm
F11 : 0.038 mm
F16 : 0.055 mm
F22 : 0.076 mm
F32 : 0.1mm
F51 : 0.2 mm

As a whole it is pretty safe to say you won't be shooting at open F-stops very often ;) At F22 your subject has to be about 15cm away before your depth of field is a single mm or if you want a depth of field of 1cm you have to move 35cm away.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 2, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thank you very much. I will keep that all in mind when choosing. And I should look then through longer lenses. I didn't think about it actually... But it's true... Thanks, it's very helpful! :)
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Oct 31, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks :)
Yes, quite. But I noticed, through all the videos and depth of field tests, that D7000 just by itself, tend to give shallower depth of fields than D5000 no matter of the aperture. That's why I am so unsure.
Just your thought: Out of the ones I stated, which one do you think will be the closest to your kind of pictures?
Reply
:iconrecoat:
Recoat Featured By Owner Oct 31, 2012   Photographer
Please use the reply button or the person you are responding to won't get the message unless they return to the forum. DOF has nothing to do with the body. It's entirely in the lens.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Oh, sorry, I thought I was "replying". Thank you for letting me know.

Alright, I'll keep that in mind.
Reply
:iconkingstephenarthur:
KingStephenArthur Featured By Owner Oct 31, 2012
I use a nikon D7000 and this is the lens I use. [link]

here are sample pictures I have taken with it. a lot of images but just trying to show everything. haha


seems kinda like the range of photos you are describing... so maybe if this is what you are looking for try to find a lens with similar specs? :)
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Thanks
Yes, quite. But I noticed, through all the videos and depth of field tests, that D7000 just by itself, tend to give shallower depth of fields than D5000 no matter of the aperture. That's why I am so unsure.
Just your thought: Out of the ones I stated, which one do you think will be the closest to your kind of pictures?
Reply
:iconkingstephenarthur:
KingStephenArthur Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012
I do not know this for a fact. but I don't think any of those lenses are capable of BOTH macro and portraiture.

the 50mm and 35mm seem like portrait type lenses and the 40mm looks like it is just a macro lens.

I do not know for a fact though.

my lens, when in portrait mode, shoots at 50mm though.
Reply
:iconcristaliaart:
CristaliaART Featured By Owner Nov 1, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Alright. Thanks a lot for the help. :) ^^
Reply
Add a Comment: