Good macro lens vs 70-300mmVR

I have two lens 55-200mm VR and a 50mm/f1.4. Looking into getting a macro lens or maybe I don't need one. Also interested in getting a 70-300mm lens VR. Which choice I realize is what I am going to do with it. I take close-ups of a product I make to put up on the web. I have previously used a macro lens on a d70 which I borrowed from a friend and it took great pix! I have had incidences in which I need a longer zoom than the 200mm.... like taking pictures of my granddaughter at a ballet recital from the balcony in low light conditions! Will the 55- 200mm do just as well as a macro lens?
--
digistamp

I have been kicking this around and currently am thinking of getting the Sigma 150mm macro and the 1.4x or 2x converter.
--
Canon A2E, Sony R1, Panny TZ5, & Nikon D5000.

If you can afford it get either the 60mm Nikon or the 105mm nikon -- both great macros. I chose the 105mm. Then go ahead and get the 70-300mm. You will find uses for them.

digistamp said:

I have two lens 55-200mm VR and a 50mm/f1.4. Looking into getting a macro lens or maybe I don't need one. Also interested in getting a 70-300mm lens VR. Which choice I realize is what I am going to do with it. I take close-ups of a product I make to put up on the web. I have previously used a macro lens on a d70 which I borrowed from a friend and it took great pix! I have had incidences in which I need a longer zoom than the 200mm.... like taking pictures of my granddaughter at a ballet recital from the balcony in low light conditions! Will the 55- 200mm do just as well as a macro lens?
--
digistamp

Click to expand...

A macro lens and this zoom cant compete with each other.

just get both.

The zoom cant catch 1:1

the Macro cant be as flexible in reach as this Zoom. (any macro is good)

Do your self a favor and dont buy twice the same porpouse lens, at the end will be cheaper to get the goodone(expensive ) in the first place.

i have been on this road before.

Joaquin

Have you tried using the 55-200 that you already have for the product shots? You didn't say anything about what your product is, or how large, but I would think it would be good enough for this purpose. The lens focuses to 1.1m and gives a max magnification of 1:4. Even if you can't completely fill the frame, you have more than enough pixels to crop and still make a nice looking web image (the web does not require very high resolution images.) Of course, with an auxiliary close-up lens, you could get a little closer.

I take pictures of food for my wife's website, and I also take lots of pics for ebay. I have been using an 18-135mm nikkor and never felt the need for a macro. I always use a tripod, and usually set the lens to about 90mm or 100mm for a comfortable working distance. Of course, I do have to be mindful of the lens' minimum focusing distance.

I would be more concerned about the choice of lens for your daughter's ballet recitals. The 70-300 VR is an excellent lens for the money, but it is fairly slow which is not optimal for low light. You didn't say what your camera body is, but if you have one of the newer models with good high iso performance you could probably get away with it. Unfortunately, low light telephoto shots are one area where inexpensive lenses force you to make significant compromises.

--
pschatz100
It's not how many pixels you have... but how you use them.

How large are the items you're producing for sale on the internet? If your 55-200VR doesn't get you close enough a Canon 500D close up lens should allow (attached to your 55-200 VR to get enough. Since web pictures don't require the the extreme sharpness a true macro produces the Canon 500D is a good economical way to solve your problem. BTW the 55-200 VR + Canon 500D does produce very sharp photos just not to the extreme of a true macro lens. This should also leave enough money for the 70-300 VR if you think you need that lens.

Another option would be the very cheap Vivitar/Cosina/Phoenix/Promaster 100mm f3.5 AF Macro. It goes down to 1:2 alone and 1:1 with the included close up lens. It has been discontinued for a while but can be picked up on ebay for $165 buy it now most any day. It's build quality reflects it's cheap price but the lens is sharp. It's a screw drive lens so it will not focus on a camera without a drive motor.

--
Snapshott

what about getting the 70-300 VR and some close-up filters, such as the Nikon 5T and 6T? there will likely be some image degradation, but it may not be objectionable, and it wouldn't cost you too much.

you can get quite close with the Nikon 70-300 mm VR

this picture is without PP
f/5.6
1/200 shutter
ISO 200
300 mm
on D60

full size





100% crop





but will it be fast enough?

I have no experience with f/5.6 at 300 mm in low light ballet theatre, but you will get quite long shutter speeds and a lot of blur, I think

but of cource you can tjeck with your 55-200 mm VR as it have the same f/5.6 at 200 mm