Food Photography & Macro

G

grwiffen

Messages
63
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi
I'd like your views and opinions please....
Is it worth going for a macro lens for food photography? The items are about 6-12" in length and I'm trying to showe the finished dish in each photograph.
I have used a 105mm Macro lens, but there's no real diofference between taking 'normal' shots with that or with my normal 50mm lens, other than I have to stand further away to fill the frame.
Any comments or suggestions please.
Tx Graham
 
Macro lenses have a tendency to produce very sharp images in a non macro environment. If you feel you might do any macro photography, then I'd say yes. Two birds with one stone.
 
If you have both lenses, try both lenses and see which gives you the better results. I personally haven't used the macro lens for food because it's primary purpose is to make small things look big. That said, I did use it for a landscape sunset lol so why the hell not? :D Try 'em both See how it goes. Here's what a Sigma 105 Macro lens focused at infinity can do.

1247030217_8qhqY-O.jpg
 
Tx for the feedback. I am trying out different lenses to see what difference, if any, it gives.
The macro / prime lnses do give a much better image quality though.
Tx Graham
 
The things that will make the biggest difference to your food photography are
(1) the presentation ("styling") of the food
(2) the lighting
(3) the choice of lens

Worrying about (3) if you haven't nailed (1) and (2) is a bit like polishing a turd. There's only so much difference it can make.

But the biggest difference you can make with a lens is to use a tilt-shift. For Nikon users that would be the PC-E 85mm f/2.8 or PC-E 45mm f/2.8. Handily both of these have near-macro capability (1:2 if I recall correctly). But the real point of using one is so that you have the ability to control where you put your plane of focus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top