Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 micro was what i wanted, but Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 was what i got. Why, you asked the three letter word, economics I replied you my answer. Looking at what the macro lens from Vicki’s and Evan’s can do, i was sorely tempted indeed.
Nikon’s micro 60mm was a hefty $760, which made me wonder do i really need such an expensive lens, even my Nikon SLR d40 was only $750. And not to mention the people around me saying it’s a waste of money since all i take with the micro lens will be food.
Therefore i decided to go for Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 ($188) instead, after reading rave reviews about the sharp and bokeh effects, which also happened to be Nikon’s cheapest lens. Sharp it was, with superb bokeh effects, but i realised it isn’t suitable for taking food.
For taking portrait shots, it worked wonders, but for taking close up food-graphy, it ain’t the same as micro lens. Not to mention it wouldn’t AF on the entry level d40, and i have to learn MF from scratch, which wasn’t easy.
I especially liked the last two photos, still learning how to handle the lens with the manuel focus. Think i’ll use this for the portrait shots, and the Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 micro does seems to make a nice little present for Christmas! No matter, welcome to the family!
Cheers,
Brad
When you’ve enough money, change the body loh! Than can use auto focus with any lens!
50mm is a very good for portraits too! should invest in the f1.4 leh!
claudia — October 12th, 2008 at 8:26 pmhahaha! you are tempting me. But i don’t think i will change the body so fast la. Body expensive man. ya i try taking portrait shots with the 50mm, the results very good. f1.4 about 200 bucks more leh! nvm, 60mm micro here i come : )
ladyironchef — October 12th, 2008 at 8:33 pmwow….you picked up the photography skills using the DLSR yourself? What a hefty price to pay for taking nice pics. Haha.
FoodiesQueens last blog post..133. Foodies Queen @Henderson Waves
FoodiesQueen — October 12th, 2008 at 10:39 pm*DSLR
FoodiesQueens last blog post..133. Foodies Queen @Henderson Waves
FoodiesQueen — October 12th, 2008 at 10:40 pmI don’t remember being that rich when I was in army - nevertheless jiayou! Your photos are getting better each day.
His Food Blog — October 12th, 2008 at 11:02 pmHis Food Blogs last blog post..The BEEFY Series Part 3 - Cicada
Wow, I am looking forward to more yummy pictures… Macro lens was too expensive for daddy to invest. He and his photography buddy went for a cheaper alternative… The Hoya Filter (Close up +2 and +3) lens…
Here is some of his collection…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tocksuan/
Not too bad right? I am proud of him, he picked up photography only a year ago…
Fen — October 12th, 2008 at 11:08 pmhey nice pics!!!!!!! i think they work better than my macro lens. very beautiful! basically i think taking food pics are the same? just need some time to get used to it. nvm lah, just try. i’m sure u will get the hang of it in no time!
Evan — October 12th, 2008 at 11:52 pmthere a new AF-S 50mm f1.8G with auto focus lens which is compatible with the DX series. i was so excited about it until i saw the price. US$440! *faints*
Nic (KHKL)s last blog post..Restoran Super Kitchen @ Taman Usahawan Kepong
Nic (KHKL) — October 13th, 2008 at 12:57 pmNice, love the bokeh effect
Vicki. — October 13th, 2008 at 1:37 pmVicki.s last blog post..FOR SALE
ah, pretty pretty!
sp* — October 13th, 2008 at 5:20 pmThe 1.4 would have been a better buy IMHO. At least your lens is better then mine, a 2.8 :S
fatpigs last blog post..New York New York
fatpig — October 13th, 2008 at 9:55 pmhey how much u buy for ur DSLR? cos i intend to learn taking photo n take pic of food.
mike.s last blog post..monday grey.
mike. — October 14th, 2008 at 6:43 pmfoodiequeen: No choice, addicted to it already. ha
hfb: When are you getting your dslr? : )
Fen: wow, your dad’s photos are nice, he didn’t use macro lens? but some of his shots which took insects and flowers are very macro-ist
evan: haha! no la, how can compare with macro lens. the 50mm f1.8 can’t take close up shots, have to take from quite a distance.
Nic: really? but it will add up to 600+, like that almost close to the 60mm macro lens liao. haha
vicki: yeah i like the bokeh effects too
sp:
fatpig: ya but its about 200 bucks more.
mike: i paid 750 for my nikon d40, and 188 for my new lens, the 50mm f1.8
ladyironchef — October 17th, 2008 at 8:19 pmHe finds the macro lens too expensive. He only use close-up filters and mount the cammie on the tripod…
Fen — October 17th, 2008 at 11:32 pmfen: how does the close up filters work? how much is it?
ladyironchef — October 17th, 2008 at 11:42 pmAccording to him, each filter is less than $20 bucks. It works like a UV filter which you fit it on the existing lens and is something like a magnifying lens…
Unless you want the blurring of the background and the narrow depth of view, a macro lens is not really necessary.
In fact, he showed me by reducing the shutter speed, the background can be darkened and a small F-stop can narrow down the depth of view…
Fen — October 19th, 2008 at 11:50 pmfen: yr dad uses +2 and +3? there’s +4 too right? how come he uses both? so cheap eh? then i think i get one before i get my macro lens. haha
ladyironchef — October 21st, 2008 at 7:28 pmThe advantage of using close-up filters is that you don’t have to change the lens. My dad is paranoid with dust… For Hoyu filters, it seems that anything above +5 will compromise on the image quality. A better brand will be Raynox (High Definition Conversion Lenses) but more expensive…
To him, he can use “mechanical zoom aka legs” if he needs a +4.
For your reference, http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/egindex.htm
Fen — October 22nd, 2008 at 12:03 amfen: so +2 and +3 is enough already eh? hmm, maybe will get one and try, since its so cheap. haha. thanks for the info
ladyironchef — October 22nd, 2008 at 6:48 pm