1. From : Toby (toby@whatever.com)
Url : http://
Date : 05:31 PM Sunday 19 February, 2006

Is there any reason why you'd go for the F3.5 instead of the F2.8? Wouldn't it be handy having that extra stop of light?

---

2. From : rick oleson (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 12:43 AM Sunday 19 February, 2006

Yes, that would be my choice. And I would look at Jessops before eBay (assuming they are similar to our KEH), the service and warranted condition are worth a bit of extra price. Cost goes with length: the 55 will be much less than the 105 or 200. All are excellent quality and will do essentially the same job but at different distances from the subject.

---

3. From : Toby (toby@whatever.com)
Url : http://
Date : 06:36 PM Saturday 18 February, 2006

Rick, Thanks a lot for your comprehensive response. It's really good of you to spend your free time helping people and giving good advice. So this is the sort of lense you recommend then:- http://mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/late70nikkor/micro/index.htm I haven't seen any of these on eBay or anywhere... Here in the UK Jessops have a good range of second-hand stock. I think I'll try them. Thanks again, Toby

---

4. From : rick oleson (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 09:15 AM Saturday 18 February, 2006

Hi Toby: You have a number of options for getting into macro with your Nikon.

As you suggest, the cheapest is a set of screw-in closeup lenses. These typically come in a set of 3: a +1, a +2 and a +4, that can be stacked for more power. However, this will also give the lowest quality results, and you need to stop down to f/11 or so when using them. Also, these have more power when used with longer lenses, so with your 200 you don't want to overdo it: with a +1 lens your 200 will focus to about 2 feet and give about a 1:3 magnification ratio (meaning that at the close focus limit you will fill the frame with an object about 3 times the size of the negative, or about 3 x 4.5 inches). You can also use these closeup lenses on the camera's regular 50mm lens - the results are similar, except that you have to get closer (with more closeup-lens power) to get the same magnification ratio. The closer you get, though, the poorer your sharpness is going to be with these.

There are also "achromat" 2-element closeup lenses, which work the same way as the regular ones but give significantly better quality. They cost a whole lot more though, and are generally made by the camera manufacturers. At the price level of these, you have other choices that may be better.

Probably the best performance for the money is a 55mm Micro-Nikkor macro lens, in either f/3.5 or f/2.8 speed. For the FM2N, you need an AI or AIS series lens (autofocus is fine too), or a non-AI lens that has been converted to AI specs. KEH.com has these for anywhere from $80 to $120 in good condition. This lens focuses from infinity to a 1:2 reproduction ratio without attachments, and it gives an image quality far beyond anything else I have to suggest here. Nikon macro lenses are not only among the very best there is, but they are also among the less expensive on the used market because their excellent quality led to larger production numbers than other brands.

There are a large variety of "Macro" zoom lenses in the Nikon manual focus mount, from many manufacturers. Typically, these focus to a 1:4 magnification ratio. You'll probably find that more than half of the zooms in the 70-210mm ballpark have this capability, and many of them will be very inexpensive. However, even a good quality "macro zoom" is by no means equal to a true macro lens such as the 55mm mentioned above. Like the screw-in closeup lenses, they are handy for occasional, casual closeup use but compromises have been made in their design to accommodate the zoom feature, close focusing and reasonable cost all in one lens.

If you feel that the 55mm will require you to get too close to your subject, there are 100mm (maybe 105 in the Nikons) macro lenses, but they tend to be much more expensive than the 55 - again, generally because there are fewer of them. Another possibility is to add a good quality 2x teleconverter to the 55mm... not optically ideal, but it can give good results; certainly the equal of most macro zooms and better than the closeup lenses, and cheaper than a 100 macro lens.

As you might guess from the above, I personally use the 55/3.5 Micro Nikkor, and add a teleconverter occasionally if i feel i really need more breathing space. i hope this helps..... rick :)=

---

5. From : Toby (Toby@world.com)
Url : http://whatever.com
Date : 09:12 PM Friday 17 February, 2006

Hi Rick, I have a Nikon FM2 and I'd like to try some macro photography. I have a 200mm prime Nikkor lens (which you recommended). I've been told that the cheapest way for me to get macro capability is to put an adaptor on the end of my 200mm lens to enable me to focus close up. Would you agree? I've seen a Sigma zoom lens with macro capability, but it was an autofocus lens which would be pointless on the FM2. Are there any old Nikkor zoom lenses which have macro capability? Thanks a lot, Toby

---

6. From : rick (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 01:11 PM Wednesday 15 February, 2006

No, and no. If you do a lot of close-up flash work the FM3a may be a good move.... I don't think it's a real big deal at greater distances, but for things like macro work TTL flash is a tremendous advantage.

---

7. From : Paul (glombick@gmail.com)
Url : http://
Date : 11:25 AM Wednesday 15 February, 2006

This may sound idiotic, but does the FM2 or FM2(n) have TTL flash I know the FM3a does. What about the FE10 or FM10? I am frustrated by my inablilty to get good fill flash using a Vivitar 283 flash on my FM2(n). Is is worth upgrading to a FM3? Any suggestions? Thank you.

---

8. From : rick oleson (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 10:17 AM Saturday 04 February, 2006

Mark, if I understand what you're describing, this is the way it's supposed to work. When the lens is not mounted on the camera, the aperture blades are at the selected aperture. When you mount the lens on the camera they open to full aperture so that you have the brightest possible image and the shallowest possible depth of field for viewing and focusing. The only time that the blades close down to the selected aperture on the camera are (1) during the actual exposure, or (2) while you hold the depth-of-field lever down. With the DOF lever depressed and the blades thereby closed, you can observe the depth of field at your selected aperture.... but at the cost of a greatly darkened viewfinder and in most cases a disabled focus aid in the center of the screen.

The exposure meter in the camera, also, reads correctly ONLY when the aperture blades are fully open - regardless of the selected aperture. The lens mount includes linkage (a ring surrounding the lens mount) that communicates the selected aperture information to the meter so that it will read correctly without stopping the lens down. If I am not understanding your description correctly, you might want to contact me at my email address above and we can go into it in more detail. rick :)=

---

9. From : mark (marksclone@yahoo.com)
Url : http://
Date : 01:22 PM Friday 03 February, 2006

I do this and it takes the picture. the blades come down and all is fine. the problem is that at f16 the aperture is still wide open on the maximum, and i think because there is something up with the depth of field lever. i think this as the lense has the correct aperture diameter prior to its mounting moving over the depth of field release section. its almost as if the depth of field lever should not be there as it is causing the problem. thanks

---

10. From : rick oleson (rick_oleson@yahoo.com)
Url : http://rick_oleson.tripod.com
Date : 10:40 AM Friday 03 February, 2006

Hi Mark: Mount a lens on your camera, set the lens to f/16 and the shutter to 1 second. Looking into the lens, release the shutter. Do you see the lens aperture blades close down for a second and then reopen?

---

PAGE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122