How well does the macro lens perform? I'm interested in photographing insects and I'm curious about how close the lens will focus.
2086683
I'm trying to post a close-up taken with the macro. I was about 2 inches away, the camera focused very well, and you can see details expected of about 10x- and very clear.
304859
No. This lens has a magnification factor of .31. True macro lenses have a magnification of 1X (meaning the object is actual size on the surface of the sensor) or more. I'm not sure how small your intended subjects are but a macro lens might not be powerful enough to reveal truly microscopic details, i.e., great for insects, not so helpful for cellular structure.
768300
It has both macro and super macro settings, and I think it works great, especially for this price range. Flowers? No problem. Bugs? Might be more of a problem, unless you can get them to pose for you! I often take close-up photos of toy cars, and most of the time it shows more detail in the photo than I ever see when I examine them, even with my glasses on!
597480
How does the macro fit on the camera? The fisheye part threads on but doesn't take focused pictures, the macro and fisheye doesn't seem to have any way to fit on? This came with NO instruction manual so I'm at a bit of a loss.
659561
I would suggest getting the 105 mm macro if you want a true macro for closeup photography with any Nikon camera. I've used this lens for four years and have been extremely satisfied with sharpness and bokeh. At extreme macro settings, autofocus should be turned off, as it has difficulty searching for focal points. A 1:1 macro ratio is achieved when end of lens is approximately 5 1/2 inches from the subject.
726798
Macro lenses are by design usually better than most prime lenses. In this case my Nikon 40mm will out preform most of my very expensive primes. And yes they carry this performance to any distance.And contrary to the other commentary it will focus accurately at any distance including infinity. I know because I use it thus many times a week.
379183
Your probably too close for what the lense your using can handle. Have you tried auto focus? For macro shots its almost easier to use anyways.
2156710
Hi there... I have this lens, and love it, for its total flexibility - it is a perfect traveller's lens. It is not exactly a "macro" lens, though I have used it with success to make some close-ups. If you then buy a close-up set (1+2+3), I am sure it can handle many of your macro needs - though you should bear in mind that that is not what it was designed for, nor is it a lens with low aperture readings - i.e. - it will be darker than your average macro lens.
676894
Hi I like mine a lot. Just be sure you not getting the most powerful one as its too much magnification( the 250) . It's no macro lens but I think it's worth the money
2201490
the macro is very good, you can see veins on a flower less than an inch across. The only issue I found is with lighting, when you are shooting macros in low light, the onboard flash will be partially blocked...in these cases, I back up a few inches and crop in post production, you don't lose much if any definition. It is also very touchy about focusing in tight spaces, a trick I have used is to use my fingers beside my subject, focus on my fingers then move the camera while holding the focus. all that aside, I love this camera, it truly does it all...macro to sports. Highly recommend. the macro is very good, you can see veins on a flower less than an inch across. The only issue I found is with lighting, when you are shooting macros in low light, the onboard flash will be partially blocked...in these cases, I back up a few inches and crop in post production, you don't lose much if any definition. It is also very touchy about focusing in tight spaces, a trick I have used is to use my fingers beside my subject, focus on my fingers then move the camera while holding the focus. all that aside, I love this camera, it truly does it all...macro to sports. Highly... » Read More the macro is very good, you can see veins on a flower less than an inch across. The only issue I found is with lighting, when you are shooting macros in low light, the onboard flash will be partially blocked...in these cases, I back up a few inches and crop in post production, you don't lose much if any definition. It is also very touchy about focusing in tight spaces, a trick I have used is to use my fingers beside my subject, focus on my fingers then move the camera while holding the focus. all that aside, I love this camera, it truly does it all...macro to sports. Highly recommend. « Show Less
1806287
The macro switch opens up focus closer to the lens when the lens is at 200-300mm, and it prioritizes close focusing. Without it enabled, the DoF (depth of field) is at 2 meters to infinity, so your insect would have to be at that range. Enabled, the distance is halved, meaning you can have that insect at 1m (or just under 3 feet) and still be within the DoF.
1610125
No- the focusing distance is much too far. Great lens- but not for macro work.
552636
I had a Canon 50mm 2.5 macro ,it is real reliable, it is an older lens, very sharp also great for portrait work it creates a soft bokeh.
372804
Yes, I would think it's the main reason to have this lens. Some say the lens gets too close to the subject when used for macro work, I have not found that to be a problem. I find the lens very useful especially all around, but would probably not own it if not for its macro capability.
1845477
It can focus pretty close at all focal lengths, but it doesn't have a formal "macro" position. There's a discussion of this on cameralabs site, see the review of this lens. He claims a magnification ratio of 1:2.6 is possible. I haven't measured it myself, but it is a good lens for closeups.
386985
I get that same problem (I also have a D7000). However, on mine that is only for close-up macro-type images (when I snap the photo, the focus seems to be farther than where I focused - I lost out on some neat bug photos because of it, and did a lot of testing compared to other lenses). It does OK at distance. My adjustment is less than that (I don't remember it), but I don't use it much for close-ups. I use it mostly for wide shots and landscape work, and also inside museums. In a perfect world, I would buy the 24-70mm f/2.8 Nikon, but this is a third of the price, and for my application is fine. However, if you are shooting people at closer ranges, I can see where it might be an issue. That far off, and it might be worth talking to Sigma about it. They might be able to either fix it or replace it.
1649060
There are two versions - the OS (optical stabilized) and the non-OS versions. The non-OS version is somewhat smaller and lighter, and a bit over half the price of the OS version. Both are very sharp lenses, and are quite good for macro work as well as portrait work. The longer 150mm focal length is particularly good for focusing on live critters such as insects; you can get further away and perhaps not scare them off! The OS does help with portrait work, but usually you turn the OS off and use manual focus for macro work. Personally I have the OS version and am quite happy with it.