Macro EXTENSION RINGS and Wide Angle Lenses

vodka

vodka

Messages
64
Name
Vodka, Vodka Tuwuf
Edit My Images
Yes
Greetings All

I'm currently driving a Nikon D40 and intend sticking with it. The lens however, i'm wanting to upgrade the standard 18-55 lens that came with the camera.

Mostly my work involves people, whether it be portrait or sports of some description, and animals. However I'm also expanding my portfolio to include macro shots which leads me to my first question: are macro extension rings effective for virgin photographers like myself??? Before you answer, pls bear in mind i'm not currently working and won't be until next year at the earliest. I'm also a solo mortagee so until i'm back working, i'm somewhat limited with regard to what macro lens can be afforded.

My next question is with regard to wide angle lenses as another area of photography i'm attempting is nightscape work. Given i'm dabbling in nightscape work and i take sports photos, i need a lens that will provide sharp images in low light conditions with speedy auto-focus. I've researched the macro lens and read the TP wide angle lens threads but still unsure which would be the more effective, and economical lenses to cover all of the above aspects out of the Tokina AT-X 116 PRO DX, the Nikon AFS VR 70-300mm or the Nikon AFS DX VR 55-200mm???

All other suggestions also welcome ;)
 
anyone :crying:
 
Extension rings are not really usefull for macro photography, your d40 has a asp-c sized captor so a 70 to 300 macro (like the cheap sigma one on amazon for 180$) is well enough reach to get sharp shots.

For portraits I prefer using a 75-200mm so I can crop my images better and have a nice DOF.

hope that helps.
 
Macros rings, better known as extension tubes are designed for macro and will be fine with your lens. A cheaper alternative is a close up lens; I believe Raynox do some popular ones, but there is plenty of choice.

I don't really understand your third paragraph - nightscapes, wide-angles, sports, telezooms? Can you separate out specific questions? Cheers.
 
thank you Maxathos but is the Sigma 70-300 macro different again from the Nikon AFS VR 70-300mm??? ie would the nikon not take macro shots as sharp as the Sigma?
 
HoppyUK said:
........

I don't really understand your third paragraph - nightscapes, wide-angles, sports, telezooms? Can you separate out specific questions? Cheers.
Click to expand...

OK in short Hoppy, fundamentally i'm wanting a cost effective wide angle lens with quick auto-focus for sports photos but ideally the same lens that'll handle low light best for nightscape work.

I guess to simplify my question further, which out of the Nikon AFS VR 70-300mm and the Nikon AFS DX VR 55-200mm has the fastest auto-focus???

(After further research, I've ruled out the Tokina all together.)
 
You're asking about wide-angles, then listing tele zooms, sports and then nightscapes. On the face of it, you could be looking at three completely different lenses there :thinking:

But out of the two lenses you've listed, the 70-300 VR is the better quality lens all round, if that is the focal length range that you want. Neither of them is an upgrade of your kit lens as stated in your OP, they're completely different.
 
tak i'm confusing myself now Hoppy but predominantly the lens will be used for sports photos so you've pretty much answered my question (y)
 
HoppyUK said:
Macros rings, better known as extension tubes are designed for macro and will be fine with your lens. A cheaper alternative is a close up lens; I believe Raynox do some popular ones, but there is plenty of choice.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's what I say too.

The cheap rings don't have electrical contacts (never had a Nikon but I'm assuming all lenses have electrical contacts by which they talk to the camera to generate AF?), the better ones such as Kenko brand do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top