50mm f/1.4 for Macro

[RockNGoalStar]

Hi All,

I am considering getting a 50mm 1.4 lens for my D90, mainly for portraiture / low-light conditions.

I have decided to go for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX HSM as I prefer the look of the bokeh to the Nikkor versions.

My question is this... Can I use this lens as a macro lens? I know it will have a wafer-thin DoF and should produce some nice results, but will I have enough magnification and a small enough focusing distance to get close enough?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Many thanks,

Tom

[ktuli]

Tom,

Looking at the specs, that lens has a minimum focusing distance of 17.7 in / 45 cm. However, at a maximum magnification of 1:7.4, I would not consider it macro at all, and you're probably going to be hard pressed to put accessories (extension tubes/close-up filters) on it to make it get close to 1:1.

- Bill

[ilovelucydog]

I have the Nikkor... I love it, but no, it is not a macro lens.

[RockNGoalStar]

OK thanks for the replies. I have bought the 50mm anyway - I want a nice portraiture lens with low-light capability and nice bokeh and shallow DoF.

If I get into macro photography in the future then I will just have to buy a dedicated macro lens I guess!

[ktuli]

OK thanks for the replies. I have bought the 50mm anyway - I want a nice portraiture lens with low-light capability and nice bokeh and shallow DoF.

If I get into macro photography in the future then I will just have to buy a dedicated macro lens I guess!

oh - don't get me wrong... I'm certain you'll be very pleased with the lens... just if you tried to use it as a macro, you would not be pleased.

And yes, if you really want to get into macro, there is no substitute for a dedicated 1:1 macro.

- Bill

[Mark Lawrence]

Why don't you put extention tubes on before the lens and give it a go,you might be excited at you results!

[Geoff F]

If I get into macro photography in the future then I will just have to buy a dedicated macro lens I guess!

A lot will depend on exactly what you want to photograph, Tommy. But if you want to get serious about small insects, etc, then it will be 'quite a lot'. So start saving now.

And the usual warning: Macro photography can be addictive and will seriously damage your wealth.

[djg05478]

"I have decided to go for the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX HSM as I prefer the look of the bokeh to the Nikkor versions."

Very curious about this. Does the manufacturer of the lense really make a noticable difference in regards to lense blur? Blurry is blurry isn't it? ...and more a result of aperature and distance? Just curious...school me.

Debbie

[RockNGoalStar]

Very curious about this. Does the manufacturer of the lense really make a noticable difference in regards to lense blur? Blurry is blurry isn't it? ...and more a result of aperature and distance? Just curious...school me.

I think that, as the Sigma's lens is made up of 8 elements compared with 7 in the Nikon, the bokeh is a little bit 'creamier'. Certainly having looked at many picture comparisons I prefer the results of the Sigma. Also the Sigma is a much bigger piece of glass which helps to reduce vignetting.

I'm not saying the Nikkor is a bad lens, far from it, but if I'd bought it then I know I'd have always pined for the slightly more expensive Sigma.

[Jim B.]

You could try this technique with your 50mm.
http://www.kirpi.it/Photo/Reverse-le...reflex-cameras