[martyo]

Hi. I'm just a point and shoot guy but my wife likes to shoot close-ups, or I should say would like to do close-ups. She has a tendency to try many different "hobbies" but gets bored and moves to something else. I'm looking for guidance. Something decent to start learning but able to give her nice results with close-ups when she has the proper settings etc. Looking to go new rather than used. Any insight would be helpful.
Thanks

[JohnR]

Did you have a budget in mind?

[martyo]

Hi John. I'd like to keep it under a grand. Not looking for SOTA, but a camera that will get her the close ups she wants as is but is good enough for her to grow and add too. I'm saying that without really knowing how much it takes.

[Photon46]

If good results with macro photography are a priority, make sure to include money for a decent starter tripod in your budgeting. If I may ask, are you sure you need a DSLR if you don't need state of the art? How "macro" does she want to go? No doubt, a DSLR will be the best from technical considerations for macro work, but using one comes at a price of greater weight and cost. A more portable mirrorless camera geared for a serious amateur might be worth thinking about if portability and weight are an issue. Every camera category has pluses and minuses, no perfect all rounder. If you're not familiar, www.dpreview.com is a good resource for evaluations of cameras and lenses.

[yamaha626]

Costco is running a very interesting special currently. Its a package deal that consists of a Pentax K30 dslr & starter zoom lens and a WG-1 weatherproof point&shoot. $900 if you are a costco member.

[martyo]

If good results with macro photography are a priority, make sure to include money for a decent starter tripod in your budgeting. If I may ask, are you sure you need a DSLR if you don't need state of the art? How "macro" does she want to go? No doubt, a DSLR will be the best from technical considerations for macro work, but using one comes at a price of greater weight and cost. A more portable mirrorless camera geared for a serious amateur might be worth thinking about if portability and weight are an issue. Every camera category has pluses and minuses, no perfect all rounder. If you're not familiar, www.dpreview.com is a good resource for evaluations of cameras and lenses.

Thanks for the link. I'm not sure how "macro" she wants to go. I use a 4.0mp Olympus with a 10x optical zoom and friends and family always comment on the quality of pictures from it. She wants more. I just assumed we needed to go SLR to get the close ups she would like.

[martyo]

Costco is running a very interesting special currently. Its a package deal that consists of a Pentax K30 dslr & starter zoom lens and a WG-1 weatherproof point&shoot. $900 if you are a costco member.

Thanks. We are members and I saw here looking at that. She's pretty frugal and said no because she already has a point and shoot. It was probably the $900 that she didn't like. I'll be buying the camera for her birthday so that won't be an issue.

[JohnR]

Hi John. I'd like to keep it under a grand. Not looking for SOTA, but a camera that will get her the close ups she wants as is but is good enough for her to grow and add too. I'm saying that without really knowing how much it takes.

My gear is all a few years old now, but here's a combo that may fit the bill:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/810414-USA/Nikon_2200_40_mm_f_2_8G_AF_S.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/764100-REG/Nikon_D_5100_Digital_SLR_Camera.html

That would leave some money for a bag and lightweight tripod.

Reasons. I love my 60mm macro lens, it's the lens I leave on my camera. The kit zooms are not terrible but a disappointment compared to a decent prime (or an expensive zoom). The 60mm is more expensive though, and while 40mm is a little "short" for a macro it may be more suited as a general purpose lens (as the equivalent focal length of 60 mm is only a little longer than the "normal" 50mm.)

By not getting a kit lens, you're getting a better body. More lenses can be bought later if she really gets into it.

No personal experience with those items, but perhaps food for thought. Check the reviews etc (I will too as I'm a bit out of touch and my curiosity is piqued.)

[martyo]

Thanks John, really appreciate it.

[jvc]

I agree with John's choice of camera bodies. The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, which is very good. It does extremely well in low light with no flash. Only difference I'd add is the kit lens. She may want to take more than JUST close ups, and the kit lens does very well. The 40mm macro lens is ok, but you have to get very close to the subject. The 60mm is a little better. But a 90mm will get you a little farther away from the subject, and still get macro shots, which is very handy when doing live insects, especially those that sting. The camera with the kit lens is here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/764102-REG/Nikon_D_5100_Digital_SLR_Camera.html and the 90mm macro lens I recommend is here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/330643-USA/Tamron_AF272NII_700_SP_AF90mm_f_2_8_Di.html That puts you a little over the budget listed, but worth the little extra. The Tamron 90mm lens is a very nice lens. I use one. It's cheaper than a Nikon lens, and has a better warranty. Plus Tamron has a $50 mail-in rebate on that lens now, so that gets it a little closer to your budget price ($1095.95). I doubt she'll get bored with this setup. BTW, the D5100 also does 1080p video, which is very nice. Good luck with whatever you decide on.

[woodsyi]

Hi. I'm just a point and shoot guy but my wife likes to shoot close-ups, or I should say would like to do close-ups. She has a tendency to try many different "hobbies" but gets bored and moves to something else. I'm looking for guidance. Something decent to start learning but able to give her nice results with close-ups when she has the proper settings etc. Looking to go new rather than used. Any insight would be helpful.
Thanks

I have a starter set that is a few years old.  It's an early Canon Rebel with various Canon and Sigma lenses (no EL lenses).  I lent it to Zybar when he was looking to get into DSLR.  You are welcome to get it from George and let your wife try it to get a feel for a DSLR.  It's free to try and I am not looking to sell it off.  It's earmarked for my 10 year old daughter when she gets a little more skilled to take advantage of the controls.  Right now she just composes and shoots what I set up for her.  She captures some interesting perspectives.

PM George if you are interested. 

[thunderbrick]

I agree with John's choice of camera bodies. The D5100 has the same sensor as the D7000, which is very good. It does extremely well in low light with no flash. Only difference I'd add is the kit lens. She may want to take more than JUST close ups, and the kit lens does very well. The 40mm macro lens is ok, but you have to get very close to the subject. The 60mm is a little better. But a 90mm will get you a little farther away from the subject, and still get macro shots, which is very handy when doing live insects, especially those that sting.

I agree completely on getting a longer macro optic, especially the 90mm idea.  It gives a much nicer perspective and is more versatile.  Makes a helluva portrait focal length, too.

'brick

[martyo]

I have a starter set that is a few years old.  It's an early Canon Rebel with various Canon and Sigma lenses (no EL lenses).  I lent it to Zybar when he was looking to get into DSLR.  You are welcome to get it from George and let your wife try it to get a feel for a DSLR.  It's free to try and I am not looking to sell it off.  It's earmarked for my 10 year old daughter when she gets a little more skilled to take advantage of the controls.  Right now she just composes and shoots what I set up for her.  She captures some interesting perspectives.

PM George if you are interested.

Thank you very much Rim, very generous of you to offer. I might just take you up on it.

[martyo]

Thanks to everyone, you've been very helpful. You've given me plenty to get started.

[yamaha626]

There is another way to get "macro" without spending half (or all) of your stated budget on a macro lens. You could buy a kit (any manufacturer or lens mount) that comes with a standard 50mm lens and add a lens extension. These are usually sold as kits which consist of 3 lens extenders and can often be found brand new for approx $100. Or if you prefer the macro lens idea, you can save money buy buying a manual focus macro lens.

[thunderbrick]

Very true, and if you end up with a 70-200 or so, those tubes can serve you very well for some nice looking-through views.    Neither zoom will be as sharp as a true fixed macro, but the 50mm 1.8 should be fine.

Are those sets really as cheap at $100 for an AF set?

[yamaha626]

Very true, and if you end up with a 70-200 or so, those tubes can serve you very well for some nice looking-through views.    Neither zoom will be as sharp as a true fixed macro, but the 50mm 1.8 should be fine.

Are those sets really as cheap at $100 for an AF set?

yes...b&h is selling the vivitar set for under $100

[JohnR]

Are extension rings are good recommendation for a first-time SLR user? I have only one of them and it's a PITA, I never use it.

[JohnR]

Here's what photozone say about the 40mm:

  http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/674-afs40f28dx

Very good results.

Here's what Ken "keep your salt handy" Rockwell says:

  http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/40mm-f28.htm

"The Nikon 40mm f/2.8 DX G AF-S is a fantastic normal lens with extreme close-focus ability. Get it if ultra-close focus ability is important to you in a normal lens."

He also says:

"This 40mm lens is not a good idea if you plan to use it for dedicated macro use. For serious macro use, get at least a 105mm macro lens for sanity's sake. Personally, I and everyone else serious about macro use 180mm or 200mm macro lenses."

I guess I agree with him, which is why I have a 200mm macro lens. However it's not a lens for beginners and it's not cheap either! First paragraph seems most relevant here.

It's worth bearing in mind that the (Nikon) kit lens does focus fairly close - down to almost 1:3. So that means that an object 2" across will fill most of the frame at closest focus. There will be a lot of barrel distortion but I'm guessing that these days the camera will fix it. i guess my thought here is that the kit lens isn't all that bad as a starter.

Final note. I thought there would have been more recommendations for other brands. Camera systems are a bit like... well, say, the Apple "ecosystem" - once you're in, it's hard to see out. So people can only recommend what they know. I'm sure there are non-Nikon solutions that will meet your criteria just as well. I had a lot of fun at one point with a Lumix camera that would focus very close, albeit at 28 mm EFL, which was a new experience in and of itself.

[yamaha626]

Are extension rings are good recommendation for a first-time SLR user? I have only one of them and it's a PITA, I never use it.

yeah, they're pretty much fool-proof as along as you don't stop down beyond f5.6.

I actually have an example of how easy they are to use. My dentist is a budding photographer as well as an avid gardener. She has her entire office filled with her photographs of plants and vegetables from her gardens. She uses a nikon d60 with an extension ring in-between the camera body and the zoom lens that came in the kit she purchased. Her work is quite impressive when you consider that all she uses is the cameras' built-in flash and the standard zoom lens and an extension ring. She has no specialized equipment and has very little experience but her photos blow up to 10x14 really well. And I'd bet money that she has never once changed the metering mode from "Automatic" or "Prog" or whatever nikon calls that mode now.