The new addition to LIC

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!



When you’ve enough money, change the body loh! Than can use auto focus with any lens! :P

50mm is a very good for portraits too! should invest in the f1.4 leh! :P

hahaha! 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 : )

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…

Not too bad right? I am proud of him, he picked up photography only a year ago…

hey 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!

foodiequeen: 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

According 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…

The 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,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>