Macro/micro Again!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by JackN, Apr 30, 2005.

  1. JackN

    JackN Guest

    Given the 1.5 ratio in the Nikon D70 am I correct in assuming that the
    closest focusing distance for macro lenses (Nikkor 105mm or Tamron 90mm)
    will increase. i.e. say the Nikkor gives 1:1 at 12" on 35mm will it be 1:1
    at 1'6" on the D70?

    Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to give
    much mention to that aspect of its performance.
    JackN, Apr 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JackN

    Paul Rubin Guest

    "JackN" <> writes:
    > Given the 1.5 ratio in the Nikon D70 am I correct in assuming that
    > the closest focusing distance for macro lenses (Nikkor 105mm or
    > Tamron 90mm) will increase. i.e. say the Nikkor gives 1:1 at 12" on
    > 35mm will it be 1:1 at 1'6" on the D70?


    The close focus distance will say the same and the actual magnification
    ratio on the film or sensor will stay the same. The "1.5 ratio" just
    means the D70 image is cropped (the digital sensor is smaller than a film
    frame) so the angular coverage of (say) a 100mm lens, from one edge of
    the D70 frame to the other, will be the same as a 150mm lens on a 35mm
    SLR, from one side of the film frame to the other.

    > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to give
    > much mention to that aspect of its performance.


    It's excellent.
    Paul Rubin, Apr 30, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JackN wrote:
    > Given the 1.5 ratio in the Nikon D70 am I correct in assuming that the
    > closest focusing distance for macro lenses (Nikkor 105mm or Tamron
    > 90mm) will increase. i.e. say the Nikkor gives 1:1 at 12" on 35mm
    > will it be 1:1 at 1'6" on the D70?
    >
    > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    > give much mention to that aspect of its performance.


    No. Any lens giving 1:1 will be 1:1 no matter what camera it is put on.
    If I were top take the lens from my 4X5 that can focus to 1:1 and put it on
    my 35mm it will still focus 1:1 and on my digital it will also do 1:1
    However on the 4x5 it will take in a subject 4x5 inches. On the 35mm it
    will be the same size as the 35m negative (about 1x1.5) and on the digital
    it will be smaller yet. Frankly for a digital camera that ratio has less
    meaning as we don't have a physical image that the lens focused in the
    camera, you can't really think of it as the same thing.

    For digital I would suggest considering the minimum size the lens will
    focus on and fill the frame as the measure of meaning.

    --
    Joseph Meehan

    Dia duit
    Joseph Meehan, Apr 30, 2005
    #3
  4. JackN

    Bubbabob Guest

    "JackN" <> wrote:

    > Given the 1.5 ratio in the Nikon D70 am I correct in assuming that the
    > closest focusing distance for macro lenses (Nikkor 105mm or Tamron
    > 90mm) will increase. i.e. say the Nikkor gives 1:1 at 12" on 35mm
    > will it be 1:1 at 1'6" on the D70?
    >
    > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    > give much mention to that aspect of its performance.
    >
    >
    >


    Very, very good.
    Bubbabob, Apr 30, 2005
    #4
  5. JackN

    Stacey Guest

    JackN wrote:

    > Given the 1.5 ratio in the Nikon D70 am I correct in assuming that the
    > closest focusing distance for macro lenses (Nikkor 105mm or Tamron 90mm)
    > will increase.


    Nope, focusing distance stays the same.

    > i.e. say the Nikkor gives 1:1 at 12" on 35mm will it be
    > 1:1 at 1'6" on the D70?


    What it boils down to is the object will appear more magnified on the
    smaller sensor i.e. it will fill more of the frame.

    >
    > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to give
    > much mention to that aspect of its performance.


    I'm sure it's good if it is a "regular" macro lens that focuses to infinity.
    Some of the specialized "bellows only" type lenses don't work that great at
    infinity, especially at the wider fstops.

    --

    Stacey
    Stacey, Apr 30, 2005
    #5
  6. JackN

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Bubbabob <rnorton@_remove_this_thuntek.net> writes:
    > > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    > > give much mention to that aspect of its performance.

    >
    > Very, very good.


    Oh yeah, what't the evidence? Am I supposed to believe that without
    proof? That sounds like Magical Thinking to me. ;-)
    Paul Rubin, Apr 30, 2005
    #6
  7. JackN

    Mick Brown Guest

    Paul Rubin <http://> wrote in
    news::

    > Bubbabob <rnorton@_remove_this_thuntek.net> writes:
    >> > Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    >> > give much mention to that aspect of its performance.

    >>
    >> Very, very good.

    >
    > Oh yeah, what't the evidence? Am I supposed to believe that without
    > proof? That sounds like Magical Thinking to me. ;-)


    Taken with the 105 micro on the D70, handheld.

    http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3146232

    Mick Brown
    www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown
    Mick Brown, May 1, 2005
    #7
  8. JackN

    Paul Rubin Guest

    Paul Rubin, May 1, 2005
    #8
  9. JackN

    Mick Brown Guest

    Mick Brown, May 2, 2005
    #9
  10. Mick Brown wrote:
    > Paul Rubin <http://> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >
    >>Bubbabob <rnorton@_remove_this_thuntek.net> writes:
    >>
    >>>>Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    >>>>give much mention to that aspect of its performance.
    >>>
    >>>Very, very good.

    >>
    >>Oh yeah, what't the evidence? Am I supposed to believe that without
    >>proof? That sounds like Magical Thinking to me. ;-)

    >
    >
    > Taken with the 105 micro on the D70, handheld.
    >
    > http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3146232
    >
    > Mick Brown
    > www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown


    All very good, but OP was asking about telephoto performance, not macro,
    which we can assume is pretty good allready being a Micro lens . . .
    How is the lens' performance focused on infinity?

    Cheers
    Steve
    Bartshumandad, May 3, 2005
    #10
  11. JackN

    Mick Brown Guest

    Bartshumandad <> wrote in news:CKzde.3169
    $:

    >
    >
    > Mick Brown wrote:
    >> Paul Rubin <http://> wrote in
    >> news::
    >>
    >>
    >>>Bubbabob <rnorton@_remove_this_thuntek.net> writes:
    >>>
    >>>>>Also, how good a general telephoto is the Nikkor? No test seems to
    >>>>>give much mention to that aspect of its performance.
    >>>>
    >>>>Very, very good.
    >>>
    >>>Oh yeah, what't the evidence? Am I supposed to believe that without
    >>>proof? That sounds like Magical Thinking to me. ;-)

    >>
    >>
    >> Taken with the 105 micro on the D70, handheld.
    >>
    >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3146232
    >>
    >> Mick Brown
    >> www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown

    >
    > All very good, but OP was asking about telephoto performance, not macro,
    > which we can assume is pretty good allready being a Micro lens . . .
    > How is the lens' performance focused on infinity?
    >
    > Cheers
    > Steve
    >


    Dont think I have used the lens for this much, I do however use it as a
    portrait lens with great success. I will go and do some test shots in the
    next couple of days.

    Mick Brown
    Mick Brown, May 4, 2005
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. TravisMLC

    Micro/Macro Photography

    TravisMLC, Jun 27, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    578
    Ray Fischer
    Jul 3, 2004
  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=

    Nikon Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR vs. Micro Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4_Berkowitz?=, Jun 17, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    783
  3. Ryan

    Attempts at micro/macro shots

    Ryan, Oct 11, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    544
    Floyd L. Davidson
    Oct 11, 2006
  4. ~~NoMad~~

    Micro Macro

    ~~NoMad~~, Jul 17, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    382
  5. Dr. Leonard H. McCoy

    Micro / Macro question?

    Dr. Leonard H. McCoy, Mar 28, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    613
    Anyoldiron
    Apr 2, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page