i just got 24mm 1.4G lens, any advice? i have three DX bodies: D60, D80 and D5100 and four lens: 35mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G and my favorite 85mm 1.4G. I just added 24mm 1.4G and i'm not sure how to make this lens pop. It seems in normal shooting, nothing magical about it until i get close to the subject, is that how to shoot with the lens? Close up and at 1.4 to 2.8. Also I noticed it's NOT that sharp as 85mm 1.4 or 105mm 2.8G macro. i just got 24mm 1.4G lens, any advice? i have three DX bodies: D60, D80 and D5100 and four lens: 35mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G and my favorite 85mm 1.4G. I just added 24mm 1.4G and i'm not... » Read More i just got 24mm 1.4G lens, any advice? i have three DX bodies: D60, D80 and D5100 and four lens: 35mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G and my favorite 85mm 1.4G. I just added 24mm 1.4G and i'm not sure how to make this lens pop. It seems in normal shooting, nothing magical about it until i get close to the subject, is that how to shoot with the lens? Close up and at 1.4 to 2.8. Also I noticed it's NOT that sharp as 85mm 1.4 or 105mm 2.8G macro. « Show Less
1972861
Thank You Mr. McNamara, I've got a second copy from an opened box sale for considerable discount and I'm working it till I upgrade to FX body for micro adjustments. I did shoot some video and manual focus on photos with this second copy, resulting photos have potential, so it's a keeper for now. It seems when I do get that special, magical photos, the price and issues melt away.
475200
I just received one of these today. There is no autofocus on the D60 for this lens, so you have to set it on M. Also, if you want the aperature to be set by the camera, you must lock the aperature setting ring. I've only been playing with it for a few minutes, but I've noticed you cannot always open the aperature to f/2.8 using the camera controls; sometimes only f3.3.
832291
No, it has to do with the greatest magnification of the thing you focus on, at the sensor. When you go as close as you can (i.e 0.35 m or 0.20 m in macro mode)to photograph a small object, you can get it as large as .36x natural size at the sensor, or in macro mode .72x. This is a bit less than what many regard as 'true' macro mode, which should be 1x... Not a large variety in MFT macro lenses, though! The zoom of this lens is 12-50mm (35mm equivalent focal length 24-100mm), which is 4.2x, but an entirely different number. Hope this helps! :)
2155739
There is a sliding button on the barrel of the lens that switches the lens from normal to macro. Switched to Full allows the lens to do macro photography or 1:1 which means macro. The focal length at this setting is 6 inches to 1.6 ft. I normally do not change the switch from Full as this is an excellent lens and produces the best fine art images at that setting. Go to the following website for more help. http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/systemcamera/gms/lens/dg_macro_45.html Hope this was a help.
284748
Its interesting that you should ask. I have a friend who owns a D800 and has both DX and Full Frame lenses. He says his DX lenses work just fine on the camera automatically (no adjustment). I would think that the D600 does the same. The only thing I'm not sure of is the effective pixel reduction (if any) because a smaller amount of the sensor is being exposed. NIKON must have some literature on this and I've found that Thom Hogan ("ByThom") is really good at responding to questions like this. I have used this lens for a couple of years now and it produces spectacular images on my D300. The question is whether you are willing to sacrifice the effective range with the crop factor that would still happen regardless of whether the camera you are using is full frame or DX -- that is the effective DX range is 16.5-24. You could just buy one of the other excellent 12-24 lenses out there and have the full frame wide field. But those are a lot more expensive and as Rockwell has pointed out, this is the sharpest lens in its class and having used it for some time, I think he's right.
501123
Congrats on the nice lens! I have the 17-85. It's better than my 18-55, but I would love to get the 17-55 someday. Heck, I'd like to get a lot of different lenses someday! But being completely new to dslr, I think what I have now will suffice until I get going.
910058
Photofun123-I am in a similar situation. What did you decide on and what do you think of it? I will be getting a 50d and only one lens. My main subject will be my toddler. I am considering 24-70 and 24-105. Thanks.
2163871
I am using Sigma 150mm f2.8 AF APO EX DG OS HSM for Canon. I don't have any problem to use f2.8 at 1:1. Using a tripod to shoot at flat object first to see if you can get a focused image. If you do, then the lens is good. At f2.8 and 1:1, DOF is almost 0, means that you only have a "point", or a "flat" image in focus. Macro lens using f2.8 at 1:1 has its use, may be doesn't fit for one of your applications.
1011445
I shoot weddings and started out with the original 100 macro, I then upgraded to the 100 IS macro (which is amazing) but that lens got dropped and I had to ship it out to have it repaired just before an event so I ordered the 50mm just as a place holder till I got the 100 back. I was able to make some decent images with it and it will certainly get you closer to your subjects than a non macro lens however it doesn't even come close to either of the 100 macro lenses. So short answer: if you have the money go for the 100 2.8 IS it's absolutely worth it, but if money is tight and you're simply looking to add another trick to the back then the 50 will get you by for the moment, what you will be missing is sharpness/clarity but you'll still be able to get in close and get "macro" images.
136114
There is a 65mm MACRO lens that apparently lets you get to millimeters close. The two Panny lenes I have -- the 20 and the 12.5 both let you get quite close, but they aren't macro lenses. Check on the Olympus site. There are a couple of specifically macro lenses. That's my next lens. I love macro shooting. But those tow panny lenses aren't bad at all. Adorama has (I believe ALL of the lenses, both Panasonic and Olympus) for 4/3 format, so it's another place to look. Read the specs and see what they tell you. I do know the 65mm macro gets very good reviews from users.
1521075
I just got this lens and cannot figure out how to adjust the aperture... I can only take photos in f/22 otherwise it tells me to "lock lens aperture ring at minimum aperture" even if I put it in M (manual) mode. How do I change it so the aperture is adjustable and not fixed?
797773
So this is a major concession in comparison with much less expensive cameras' focusing distances of one to two inches. Anyone with ideas as to why this is so. I used a Nikkormat with a Nikon macro lens for many years and have considered a Nikon digital body to allow continued use of the lens. Anyone with any thoughts on marrying such different technologies?
1276663
I've been using the 14-24mm f2.8 for a year now. Tack sharp! No lens creep. I was worried about no filters to protect glass also. Built in lens hood protects front element well enough. Lens cap fits OVER hood when not in use. I am comfortable with that. No VR doesn't seem to be an issue, as a lot of light comes through the glass and allows higher shutter speeds I feel. I generally shoot with a standard ISO of 400 to kick it up the speed a bit. Great lens. I also use the 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses, both at f2.8 as well. Throw any pic from these three lenses on you monitor and you could cut yourself on the sharpness. LOL. I've been using the 14-24mm f2.8 for a year now. Tack sharp! No lens creep. I was worried about no filters to protect glass also. Built in lens hood protects front element well enough. Lens cap fits OVER hood when not in use. I am comfortable with that. No VR doesn't seem to be an issue, as a lot of light comes through the glass and allows higher shutter speeds I feel. I generally shoot with a standard ISO of 400 to kick it up the speed a bit. Great lens. I also use the 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses, both at f2.8 as well. Throw any pic from these three lenses on you monitor and you could cut... » Read More I've been using the 14-24mm f2.8 for a year now. Tack sharp! No lens creep. I was worried about no filters to protect glass also. Built in lens hood protects front element well enough. Lens cap fits OVER hood when not in use. I am comfortable with that. No VR doesn't seem to be an issue, as a lot of light comes through the glass and allows higher shutter speeds I feel. I generally shoot with a standard ISO of 400 to kick it up the speed a bit. Great lens. I also use the 24-70mm and 70-200mm lenses, both at f2.8 as well. Throw any pic from these three lenses on you monitor and you could cut yourself on the sharpness. LOL. « Show Less
342704
No lens question can be answered accurately without knowing the intended subjects and lighting conditions. But if one needs a mid zoom on a D7000 and do not need wide angle, the 24-70 is the best of the lot. It is not wide on a crop sensor so you will need a wider lens for interior architecture, landscape, street etc. If your main subject is portraiture, general walking around, product, environmental lifestyle portraits, short telephoto etc, it is very good lens. I prefer it on the D7000 to my 17-55 2.8 which is DX only.. I use my 24-70 daily on a D800 and D7000 with excellent pro results for group portraiture, events, glamour etc. If you have plans on adding full frame to your collection, this lens can serve both the short telephoto and normal mid zoom functions on the DX or FX respectively. On FX it has a field of view that makes it a good architecture and landscape lens. If your primary purpose is portraiture, consider the 85 1.8G as an excellent lens for 1/4th the price however.
101690
I don't have enough information yet....what other lenses do you own, and what camera would you be shooting with? Are you the main photographer? Are you bringing lights or at least a high(er) powered flash unit?This is a great lens for macro use, but with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 this cannot be considered a fast lens at all. While a 50mm lens is fantastic for shooting in a more photojournalistic style, you will probably want something a little longer for portraits (especially if you're using a full-frame digital or film camera). Please respond with what camera(s) you'll be using and what other lenses you own and I'll give you more detail I don't have enough information yet....what other lenses do you own, and what camera would you be shooting with? Are you the main photographer? Are you bringing lights or at least a high(er) powered flash unit?This is a great lens for macro use, but with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 this cannot be considered a fast lens at all. While a 50mm lens is fantastic for shooting in a more photojournalistic style, you will probably want something a little longer for portraits (especially if you're using a full-frame digital or film camera). Please respond with what camera(s)... » Read More I don't have enough information yet....what other lenses do you own, and what camera would you be shooting with? Are you the main photographer? Are you bringing lights or at least a high(er) powered flash unit?This is a great lens for macro use, but with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 this cannot be considered a fast lens at all. While a 50mm lens is fantastic for shooting in a more photojournalistic style, you will probably want something a little longer for portraits (especially if you're using a full-frame digital or film camera). Please respond with what camera(s) you'll be using and what other lenses you own and I'll give you more detail « Show Less
739838
I suppose it has nothing to do with the cameras and all to do with that particular lens. For the price of the 50mm 1.4G plus it being a prime lens I figured it would focus super quick. It's funny that you bring up the 35mm 2.0 D lens having problems. I own that lens also and mine focuses just fine and much faster than the 50mm 1.4G. I'd love to hear what you find out from Nikon about this problem.
1111391
Dragoneer makes some really good points, particularly about go slow an buy quality. Master one lens before getting another. Personally, I think this is the best lens to start with due to its quality and versatility. Once you have a taken a lot of shots, you can determine from how you shoot what the next lens should be (if you even need another). If you find yourself in a lot situations where you wish the could go wider, get a 10-24mm zoom; if you find you're cropping a lot of shots when zoomed all the way in, get the 70-300 (if you have the 18-140, don't get anything that only goes to 200 unless you want to drop some $$ on something faster). This a lens you can keep on your camera and be ready for almost anything. With a wide zoom, mid prime and telephoto zoom, you'll have the ranges covered, but will likely be changing lens a lot. If you want another lens for a DX format camera - the 35mm 1.8 is fantastic and an extreme bargain - super-sharp, great for low-light and terrific for experimenting with shallow depth of field. If I could only keep 2 of my lenses, it would be this one and the 35mm.