What Lens

[oracle]

My wife want a Macro lens for portrait pics and such. what lens is a good all round lens, that doesnt kill my bankroll? it is for her nikon d60. any input or pics taken with a 50mm macro would be helpful.

She has been looking at these:

http://www.bccamera.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=13_14&products_id=45

[dmogx]

that's (50mm f1.8D) not a macro lens.

You could consider the Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro,
Nikkor 60mm f2.8 Micro
Nikkor 105mm f2.8 Micro
Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro
Tokina 100mm f2.8 Macro
Sigma 105mm f2.8 Macro

I believe most of these macro lenses are around the 500-1000 mark regardless.  Cheaper for the last 3 mentioned.

[IMASA]

Cheapest way for macro would be to get an extension tube or reverse ring and use that 50mm.  I wanted a macro lens too so I got a Tamron 90mm but I hardly ever use it for a macro, end up using it mostly for portraits.  Most of those 50-60mm macros aren't that great for bugs and such.  Boostslut's got killer macro shots, see if he'll chime in here.

[dmogx]

oh i forgot about the Nikkor 85mm f3.5G that just came out.. goes for around 560.

check this link out to see prices and what not..
http://www.photoprice.ca/?man=&cat=00003

[oracle]

Cool. I'll check it out.

So for portraits and such, is a macro or micro better. And what diff does it make from like a 50mm or 60mm. Thanks

[Ice-520]

Macro lens have the ability to focus to very close objects thus enabling you to shoot very small objects like bugs and flowers up close.

Macro lens are not designed for portraits, but they can be used as such if you wanted to.

50mm or 60mm are the focal lengths. Wide angle lenses (short focal length) capture more because they have a wider picture angle, while tele lenses (long focal length) have a narrower picture angle.

[dmogx]

lol macro = micro.. macro is what all the companies call it, micro is what nikon calls it..

50mm and 60mm is basically, for lack of better words, how 'zoomed' in it is lol..
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/learning_center/tools/focal-length-comparison.php  play with that, you'll get what i mean haha.

[oracle]

Sweet. Thanks lay-ton and dan. I'll read up.

[rancid]

I have a couple of lenses that I use for portraits...just depends on what I want to capture with the background.  The best protrait lens I've used so far has been my Nikon 50mm f1.4 manual focus lens.  It's a bit of a pain with the manual focus but does the job.  If you're budget allows, check out the F1.4 lens from Nikon.  You can get it from London Drugs and if it doesn't suit your needs, you can always return it.  The 1.4 is great for low light shots as well and allows for some pretty cool tricks...if you want some samples, let me know and I can send some over to you or you can come on over and check them out.  The 1.8 version of it is very good as well...it's a lot cheaper and does the same job.  If you like shooting with natural light, I'd suggest the 1.4...it opens up alot of options for shooting.  With the 1.8, you're not severely limited, it still does a fantastic job. 

The other lens that I use is the Nikon 18-70mm lens.  It's a kit lens that came with a few cameras but it's a damn good lens.  Fairly sharp and takes very good pics.  I've taken a few portraits (kids and adults) with it and they have turned out great.  It's also fairly good for landscape shots as well as just everyday shots here and there.  You can pick one up used for about $200 or so.

If I were in your shoes, I'd pick up the 50mm for the price.  If you can find it used, it'll be around $120 and you can find ones in pretty much new condition.  The other thing you can do is experiment a bit.  Do you have any other lenses for the D60?  If you have the 18-55 lens, it's a pretty good lens as well.  Fairly sharp.  Try shooting at 50mm and see how you like it, that way you can decide if you want to get a 50mm or not.  The only reason I got my 50mm is I like doing portrait work in natural light (whenever possible)....though I do refer back to my 18-70 quite often...also for portrait shots.  If you want flexibility...the kit lens (18-55) is more than enough.

[oracle]

^ thanks nick.

we have the kit 18-55lens and a nikon 55 - 200 1:4-5.6g ed? the pics with the 55-200 seem to come out way better. here is a couple pics of my son Xander at 6 mths that havent been photoshopped yet.

[serpico007]

My wife want a Macro lens for portrait pics and such. what lens is a good all round lens, that doesnt kill my bankroll? it is for her nikon d60. any input or pics taken with a 50mm macro would be helpful.

She has been looking at these:

http://www.bccamera.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=13_14&products_id=45

I have this lens, it isn't macro as stated above, but I prefer it to the 55-200 autofocus lens I have for my D40. It is manual focus which takes some getting used to but the photos look very nice for a $149 lens.

[rancid]

I've shot with the 55-200mm VR not the non VR and I don't think there's much difference aside from having the vibration reduction.  It's not a bad lens but it was horrible for indoors as the it hunted quite a bit to focus...causing some missed moments.  I ended up returning the lens.  I had no problems with it outdoors, it did a beautiful job.  Check your PM, sent you a couple tips to adjust the camera settings.  They are good pictures....the first one is a bit overexposed.  Stick it in lightroom and turn down the exposure a bit and you'll have a pic you'd want to frame!  Second one is not too bad....just very minor adjustments.

The kit lenses you have now is more than enough for portraits and such.  I doubt you will notice much of an improvement in picture quality if you shot with just a prime lens (50mm).  Now it would also depend on weather you want to move closer to your picture target or if you prefer to zoom in.  There are other more expensive lenses that will churn out better pics but they are near the $1000 mark or more.  Those have a lower F stop at 2.8 rather than the usual 3.5 to 5.6 or whatever it is.  So the lenses are much faster and allows you to capture more "stuff" in low lighting.