Digital slr closeups

Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2002
Posts
702
Location
Kent
Hello all

Im in the market for a SLR digital camera, which will be used to take good close ups of smallish object (coins etc). I have asked around and for my budget of approx £650 it seems that the Canon 400D body only with a macro lens is the answer

I have seen this one - Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Canon, which I presume will fit an EOS?

does anyone have any experience of macro work and give any pointers if this is a good route to go - or indeed suggest others?

thanks!

Am
 
If the sole purpose for your camera is Macro photography then for your budget I would go for :

Nikon D40 : £370
Tamron 90mm Macro lens : £270
2GB Sandisk Memory card : £20

The Canon 400D is a better camera than the Nikon D40 but you'll have to spend more than your budget to get a good Macro lens for it.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone explain the difference between this and the 105mm version?

Edit
"The Sigma lens you mentioned above isn't a true 1:1 macro lens."
it isn't? it says 1:1 in the spec...
 
SDK^ said:
If the sole purpose for your camera is Macro photography then for your budget I would go for :

Nikon D40 : £370
Tamron 90mm Macro lens : £270
2GB Sandisk Memory card : £20

If its purely for macro work, he won't need the kit lens, body only d40 can be had for well under £300.
 
Helium_Junkie said:
Edit
"The Sigma lens you mentioned above isn't a true 1:1 macro lens."
it isn't? it says 1:1 in the spec...
oops - my bad, post editied :)

alexisonfire said:
If its purely for macro work, he won't need the kit lens, body only d40 can be had for well under £300.
good spot :)
 
Nikon D40 : £275
Tamron 90mm Macro lens : £270 or Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Lens £235
2GB Sandisk Memory card : £20

Something like that would be ideal.
 
The way things are at the moment, for an extra ~£12 you can get the 400D with the kit lens -> something to ponder if you'll be taking the camera out and about with you.

The Tamron 90mm Di Macro lens is very highly regarded.

I've not really photographed a lot of coins but this one was taken recently and shot at f/29 therefore requiring a longish exposure -

422459699_99d7e6d0ae_m.jpg


Therefore you should probably factor in the cost of a sturdy tripod to your budget and a maybe also a few extra ££ for desklamps and a cheapo lightbox
 
iGiDK said:
Therefore you should probably factor in the cost of a sturdy tripod to your budget and a maybe also a few extra ££ for desklamps and a cheapo lightbox
Probably better to go for the D40 Body, that way additional stuff can be added.
 
Syk3 said:
Probably better to go for the D40 Body, that way additional stuff can be added.

Agreed with this, or maybe look at 2nd hand 350d. A 400D is a bit over the top IF you are only going to be doing macro photography. You can either pocket the rest of the money you were going to spend, or with the money left over get a decent desk lamp, light box and tripod.
 
alexisonfire said:
Agreed with this, or maybe look at 2nd hand 350d. A 400D is a bit over the top IF you are only going to be doing macro photography. You can either pocket the rest of the money you were going to spend, or with the money left over get a decent desk lamp, light box and tripod.
Agreed. But i would spend it on lighting etc. Would be needed if macro is what you're doing.

And for the money, the D40 is amazing.
 
thanks for all the replies, I have a good lighting setup, either side with column to mount camera on - it will be used for photpgraphing objects from 6 inches across down to a cm.
 
Back
Top Bottom