Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens  (Read 2215 times)

CampingFamily1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
    • Google Picasa Photo Sharing Website
Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens
« on: June 16, 2012, 07:25:01 pm »

I recently purchased a Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens for $280.

I was looking for an inexpensive macro lens for my D5100 camera and this one was the lowest cost.

I compared this lens to the Nikon 85mm f/3.5G AF-S DX ED VR Micro Nikkor Lens, which has Vibration Reduction (VR).

I would love to have VR, but the cost is $480 ($200 more), so I had to settle for the 40mm and use a tripod, or have bright light, or both.

I've used a 250W shop/work light to supply ample low cost light for flower photos indoors.

Can anyone give advice? I can still return the 40mm lens this week if I change my mind and decide to wait a year until I can justify spending $480.

What would you do? Keep the 40mm lens and try to sell it next year to help pay for the 85mm lens? Or wait patiently for the 85mm lens? How much might I be able to sell the 40mm lens for next year?

luxborealis

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2798
    • luxBorealis.com - photography by Terry McDonald
Re: Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2012, 11:21:19 pm »

Absolutely return the 40mm and buy the longer focal length! With macro, the longer the focal length the better (which is why Sigma makes a 150mm, Canon a 180mm and Nikon a 200mm macro lens). The extra working distance is invaluable as you are less likely to bump into your subject or cast a shadow on your subject. Also, the extra distance means lighting is easier and you are less likely to intrude on subjects that may be more skittish than flowers.

The extra $200 you spend now will be well worth it over the long term. In fact, I would even recommend springing for the 105mm Micro-Nikkor (I know, it's almost $900) as it is an "FX" lens ready for full frame. If, in the future, you wish to move to full-frame (and it appears Nikon may make that more affordable with rumours of a full-frame body lower in cost than the D800), you will already have an excellent macro lens. In the meantime, with the 105, you will have the equivalent of a 155mm macro lens.

The problem with photography is that there is always something better out there and always at greater cost. Finding a balance between present-day affordability and long-term usefulness is difficult. Good luck with the decision.
Logged
Terry McDonald - luxBorealis.com

CampingFamily1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
    • Google Picasa Photo Sharing Website
Re: Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2012, 10:03:18 pm »

Thank you luxborealis,

Very helpful insights!

CampingFamily1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
    • Google Picasa Photo Sharing Website
Re: Nikon 40mm f/2.8G AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR Lens
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2012, 03:52:55 pm »

I decided to return the lens under my 30 day return policy.  I will save and wait until I can buy the 85mm lens for $500.

I'm looking for the Vibration Reduction and longer working distance.

I do mostly hand held shots, with little time to set up a tripod.  With VR on my 18-55mm kit lens I could get nearly as good shots as when I used the 40mm micro.  I just have too much camera shake when holding it in my hands.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2012, 03:56:52 pm by CampingFamily1 »
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up