Photography help

[Scott R]

I purchased a Nikon D7000 thinking it would instantly make me a good photographer, but it turns out you need some technical knowledge as well. So here is where I need help.

I have a D7000 that came with a 105mm DX lens, which for shooting most things is fine. However when I take a pic of a nice p-car part I can't get a good close up shot. After reading I need a lens that's better art "macro" or what Nikon calls "micro."

If I'm understanding the math behind this, something like a 60mm macro is like a novice photgrapher and something like a 200mm is what pros use for really amazing stuff. I just need some close up shots. I arrived at 60mm from this formula:

New focal length = (FL_old x FL_close_up) / (FL_old + FL_close_up)

FL_Close_up = 1 / diopter

using 105mm = FL and 55mm close up

So I believe this will work well for me:

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D Lens 1987 B&H Photo Video

Would this be an acceptable lens for shooting small car parts?

[mjohnson]

How "close-up" are you talking about?

What Nikon calls their "Micro" or what the rest of the world calls "macro" is really, really close up. They're talking 1:1 or 1:2 reproductions -- a 1:1 on a DX camera has a field of view of ~1" wide at the closest. That's darn narrow. Hard to use and get more than a hairs' depth of focus.

If you're not taking such close-in shots, maybe careful exposures at full resolution with cropping will work? Think tripods, bright lighting, multiple tries for the best one... Shoot in RAW and sharpen/crop before compressing. If you're putting material up for viewing on a screen things don't have to be absolutely perfect.

If you _do_ need such close work - you've got a good start on used stuff. You'll be on a tripod anyway so no need for shakey-reducing-optical-fast lenses. Longer focal length is easier to deal with (at least between the 60 and the 105). Consider extension rings to get close focus. You'll be on a tripod so managing the workflow with meager metering won't be too troubling...

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by mjohnson

How "close-up" are you talking about?

What Nikon calls their "Micro" or what the rest of the world calls "macro" is really, really close up. They're talking 1:1 or 1:2 reproductions -- a 1:1 on a DX camera has a field of view of ~1" wide at the closest. That's darn narrow. Hard to use and get more than a hairs' depth of focus.

If you're not taking such close-in shots, maybe careful exposures at full resolution with cropping will work? Think tripods, bright lighting, multiple tries for the best one... Shoot in RAW and sharpen/crop before compressing. If you're putting material up for viewing on a screen things don't have to be absolutely perfect.

If you _do_ need such close work - you've got a good start on used stuff. You'll be on a tripod anyway so no need for shakey-reducing-optical-fast lenses. Longer focal length is easier to deal with (at least between the 60 and the 105). Consider extension rings to get close focus. You'll be on a tripod so managing the workflow with meager metering won't be too troubling...

For instance I can't shoot a picture of the Bosch part number on a WUR, my lens just won't focus that close up, manual or automatic. I stole this pic but this is what happens when I shoot closeup:

[slodave]

I use Nikon's 105mm "Micro".

Works like a charm.

[Scott R]

If only I could take a picture like that Dave. Very nice.

[slodave]

Yikes! I didn't realize how expensive the current 105mm "Micro" is.

This is the version I use (Just grabbed the entire ebay link):
NIKON AF MICRO NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8 Exc+ | eBay

I can't help with the 60mm, never used it before. The 105mm can do a lot, plus if you add extension tubes, you can get even closer.

[slodave]

BTW, here's another.. Lens is about 1'-1.5' from the subject.


EDIT: Tripod really does help. The first pic was taken with a homemade light box, no flash, drop on razor is with a flash.

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by slodave

Yikes! I didn't realize how expensive the current 105mm "Micro" is.

This is the version I use (Just grabbed the entire ebay link):
NIKON AF MICRO NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8 Exc+ | eBay

I can't help with the 60mm, never used it before. The 105mm can do a lot, plus if you add extension tubes, you can get even closer.

I can use that lens as well, the D7000 has both a motor drive focus, and it uses new motor in lens as well.

[slodave]

For the most part, I use manual focusing with it anyway, especially for the water drops. The old motor drive is slow, but really nothing negative, since the majority of subjects either don't move or move fairly slowly.

I just did a Google image search and the 60mm may work for you...
NIKON D7000: AF Micro Nikkor 60mm 2.8D test | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[campbellcj]

I have the 105mm f/2.8 Micro as well (current VR version) and it is truly razor sharp. However for your situation you could try just backing-up past the minimum focus distance, taking your shot, and then cropping down to the portion of the frame you want. You've got enough resolution in the D7000 to crop quite a lot and still have plenty of resolution for web purposes...

[gchappel]

Before you spend any money-
Exactly what lens are you using now? Many of nikons 105's are macro lenses.
But, as campbellcj points out- just move back far enough that the lens can focus and crop. I have more lenses than I would ever let my wife know about- and any of them could do what you are asking.
Gary

[slakjaw]

+1 you can crop a lot out of a D7k image and still have enough resolution for what you want to do. I see camera shake in the first image you posted... Try it with a tripod man. if you still need a macro, Nikon recently came out with a 40mm DX macro for i think fairly cheap. maybe look into that one.

You could take the part with you to the camera store and try out a few lenses there...

[wdfifteen]

I have to take close-up photos of small items all the time. The sizes vary, so I have to have a flexible lens. I've found vibration reduction can really help when I'm in a spot where a tripod is hard to position. Here is a photo I needed to take of a brake line flare. I took it with a 18-200 lens zoomed to 18. I shoot the highest resolution and lowest ISO I have light for and adjust the aperture for the depth of focus I need, and crop the heck out of it in photoshop.

[masraum]

You don't need a $$$ macro lens unless you are going for very high magnification. As someone stated earlier, if you're going for 1:1 or 2:1 magnification. I have a zoom that does 1:2 that is fine for most things.

As some others have stated, get as close to your subject as the camera will focus (you should be able to find the minimum focus distance in the documentation somewhere) and take the shot, then just use the portion of the photo that you need, it'll probably be more than large and clear enough.

Here's the lens that I use (except mine is the Canon compatible version)
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Autofocus Lens 5A8306 B&H

[kaisen]

Are you shooting in automatic mode? Are you using Nikon's macro mode? How are the camera settings set.

I think for taking photos of parts there should be no need for a different lens

You're not looking for the <1mm depth of field Dave is talking about

[Z-man]

Originally Posted by slodave

BTW, here's another.. Lens is about 1'-1.5' from the subject.


EDIT: Tripod really does help. The first pic was taken with a homemade light box, no flash, drop on razor is with a flash.

That is a fantastic picture dave!

I agree - a tripod would help -- with manual settings, the camera is probably shooting at 1/30th shutter speed or slower. (Back in the days of film SLR's, anything slower than 1/60th, you'd really need a tripod to prevent camera shake). If you don't have a tripod, set the camera down on the table, and use the timer instead of hitting the shutter with your finger -- that will help eliminate camera shake. (It always helps to do this in low light / slow shutter speed shots).

Scott: besides a tripod, I would also suggest using bright diffused light. (If you are in auto mode, it will help bring up the shutter speed). you don't need a fancy contraption -- if you have a worklight, just set it up pointing to a light colored ceiling, and the reflected light will work far better in capturing the detail you seek than direct light or flash.

Last thing - you may need to fiddle with camera placement - angle and distance to get the clearest shot.

Good luck and post your pics up when you got a clear shot!

-Z-man.

[Scott R]

Ordered the tripod and a few other items I need from B&H when they re-opened today. Thanks everyone!

[RWebb]

also change the lighting - Kodak has some nice old booklets from the 1970's or earlier on how to do this sort of thing (if you can find them)

you can add an aux. lens or flip a lens backwards for closeup work also - or buy an old micro lens

Lighting:

you generally want 2 lights, set at 45 deg to the subject (crossed) on each side of the camera

then put an old cut up milk jug in front of each one to diffuse the lighting

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by rw1

also change the lighting - Kodak has some nice old booklets from the 1970's or earlier on how to do this sort of thing (if you can find them)

you can add an aux. lens or flip a lens backwards for closeup work also - or buy an old micro lens

Lighting:

you generally want 2 lights, set at 45 deg to the subject (crossed) on each side of the camera

then put an old cut up milk jug in front of each one to diffuse the lighting

OK, I can try that. I actually took a lighting for film class in college and I think it applies. We learned about using a "flood" a "fill" and a "spot" and how to align them using three dimensional clocks.

I took the class for a girl, but now it appears it may pay off after all.

[Scott R]

I now have the tripod, the lens, and some time. Here is what I came up with:






Control board from a 911 electronic speedo BTW.