Recommend lens for taking food for D750

[RyanKhoo]

Hi there,

I have tried to take food photos using my Nikon D750 but so far I am not satisfied with the outcome. I am specifically frustated that I am not able to shoot near the food because of the minimum focussing distance. So, I always ended up with "things" at the side of the food that I wanna take.

So far, I tried with the following lenses that I owned:

1) 24-124 F4 Kit Lens

2) 50 Sigma DG HSM Art F1.4 (I find this lens excellent for portrait but for food the minimum focusing distance of 0.4m is a bit too long for some of my intended shot)

3) 50 F1.4G Nikkor Lens, same as the Sigma counterpart with a minimum focussing distance of 0.45m

4) 85mm F1.8

5) 20mm F1.8 Even though the min focussing distance at 0.2m is okay but at 20 it is too wide and also I somehow find the bokeh at 1.8 for the background can be more blurry ...

Kind enough to share what lens do you all use for food photography ?

Thanks

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Micro Nikkors. Food probably a 60mm. You have a choice of AFS 60mm f/2.8G or AFD 60mm f/2.8. Or MF 55mm f/2.8.

Sashimi. Nikon D300, Nikon 55mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor, 1/25 f/4, ISO 800.

 

[RyanKhoo]

Thanks diediealsomustdive,

Excellent and sharp tuna sashimi you have there with the Nikon 55 macro.

I am thinking of getting a macro lens but I also have 2 lens with focal length of 50mm (Nikon 50 F1.4 & Sigma Arts 50 F1.4) so to get a macro for 55 or 60mm seemed a duplicate.

I am thinking of getting the 105 F2.8 macro. What you think ?

I think with a 105, the background like the greens will be blurer and have better separation than the 55mm macro ?

Thanks

 

[diediealsomustdive]

If you use a 105mm to do food photography the working distance may be a bit too long, so it is very much dependent upon what level of flexibility you want to have. If you want to do shots like the one I posted, it is entirely possible to do with a 105mm Micro-Nikkor. But if you need the whole plate then it may be impossible to capture as you will be shooting from the next table.

Another way of doing this is to use extension tubes using your current lens set. Extension tubes, however, are horribly difficult to use as there is very limited working distance, i.e. if you want to include a bit more you cannot just back off and refocus, you need to change extension length as well. Currently you can get a set of AF extension tubes for about $200.

Typically 105mm and 200mm are used for insects and hard to approach subjects, and 60mm is for copying and food, etc.

I am not sure what is the attraction to your two 50mm lenses. Perhaps they have different character? My thought would be to sell one and if food is really your thing, get the 60mm. But who am I to tell you about why two 50mm? I have more than two...

 

[RyanKhoo]

If you use a 105mm to do food photography the working distance may be a bit too long, so it is very much dependent upon what level of flexibility you want to have. If you want to do shots like the one I posted, it is entirely possible to do with a 105mm Micro-Nikkor. But if you need the whole plate then it may be impossible to capture as you will be shooting from the next table.

Yes, good point, 105mm may be a bit far because sometimes with my 85mm, i also need to backoff until the table at the back leh ... :bsmilie:

Another way of doing this is to use extension tubes using your current lens set. Extension tubes, however, are horribly difficult to use as there is very limited working distance, i.e. if you want to include a bit more you cannot just back off and refocus, you need to change extension length as well. Currently you can get a set of AF extension tubes for about $200.

Thanks for the tips but I think I will skip the idea of extension tubes, too complicated for me ... lol

Typically 105mm and 200mm are used for insects and hard to approach subjects, and 60mm is for copying and food, etc.

Ok thanks for this useful tips. I was considering this 105mm because I was greedy, I thought it can also double up as a portrait lens and I do not have any prime at 105mm. The most tele prime lens that I have is 85mm, so i thought maybe the bokeh for portrait using 105mm should be better than 85mm. Then again the 105mm is F2.8 while the 85mm is F1.8

I am not sure what is the attraction to your two 50mm lenses. Perhaps they have different character?

You see, at first I have the 50 Sigma. It is good and sharp but I dunno why sometimes the bokeh can get haywire & haphazard ... also the weight is really heavy. So I get the 50mm Nikon when I travel, it's small and light ... then again i find it not as sharp as the Sigma ....

My thought would be to sell one and if food is really your thing, get the 60mm.

You are right, I also have a dilemma as I don't really know which one to sell. I suppose i just get rid of the Nikon

But who am I to tell you about why two 50mm? I have more than two...

Now, tell us your story why you have more than two ... :bsmilie:

Thanks & cheers

 

[diediealsomustdive]

OT liao.

For 2 years I had access only to a 50mm f/1.8 lens, even that was borrowed (along with the camera) so I had learned to use that lens as far as I can push it. That was 37 years ago.

Since 1986 I've always had a 50mm with me, mostly Nikon f/1.4. Used quite extensively. Had around 2000 acquired AiS 50mm f/1.8 because it was small and easy to pack for travel. From that time the collector kicked in, with 50mm Nikkor-S f/2 (marked as 5cm), Nikkor-S f/1.4, Ai f/2, AiS f/1.8, AFD f/1.8, AFD f/1.4, AFS f/1.8G SE (with my Df) and AFS f/1.4G. That's uncountable... too much one says.

Haha, also Micro-Nikkors AiS 55mm f/2.8, AFD 60mm f/2.8, AFS 60mm f/2.8, AFD 105mm f/2.8, AFS 105mm f/2.8 and AFD 200mm f/4. That's another long story.

OT liao, way OT.

 

[undergrd]

Not sure if this suggestion is valid to you.

Since you have mft, why not pair it with a Pany 20mm for food photography.

 

[Light Machinery]

Hi Ryan. As suggested by DDMD, the 60mm micro works well for food photography but the distance is very close & sometimes the lens & camera body blocks the light to the subject.

The 105mm is longer & can be used further away from from the subject.

Here are some samples,

60mm

https://flic.kr/p/pBRiQ9

105mm

https://flic.kr/p/rfbZPZ

https://flic.kr/p/qXPKcc

Also wide lens can be used too, sometimes I take food pictures with the 35, 28 or 24mm. It captures more of the background but most of it is blurred out due to the limited DOF.

35mm

https://flic.kr/p/CwLni7

 

[Nikonzen]

I always have better luck with the wides with food plates for some reason I don't know. I have always wished for a 28/2.8 Ais in my kit because it is a small razor sharp close focusing masterpiece of glass...still made brand nib to this day!

 

[thegamer1907]

I have the 55/2.8 micro, the 50/1.8 and the 105/2.8. First I would say that 105mm is too long. You will have too stand further to get more in the frame even though the mfd is lower. The 55/2.8 is ok, but I prefer to shoot my food with the entire plate visible, unlike the kind of more cropped focused shots like the sashimi photo shared. I used the 50/1.8 before but also found the mfd too limiting. In the end, I found the sweet spot for me is a 35mm lens, and I've been using a 35/2 ais for food all the time. It's also a great walk-around lens with good Bokeh. However it might be rare, and you can try the 35/1.8 FX Nano, the image quality is better for that lens

Sent from my R7sf using Tapatalk

 

[RyanKhoo]

Thanks LM for showing us your photo and letting me have a better feel ...

Hi Ryan. As suggested by DDMD, the 60mm micro works well for food photography but the distance is very close & sometimes the lens & camera body blocks the light to the subject.

The 105mm is longer & can be used further away from from the subject.

Here are some samples,

60mm

https://flic.kr/p/pBRiQ9

105mm

https://flic.kr/p/rfbZPZ

https://flic.kr/p/qXPKcc

Also wide lens can be used too, sometimes I take food pictures with the 35, 28 or 24mm. It captures more of the background but most of it is blurred out due to the limited DOF.

35mm

https://flic.kr/p/CwLni7

 

[RyanKhoo]

In the end, I found the sweet spot for me is a 35mm lens, and I've been using a 35/2 ais for food all the time. It's also a great walk-around lens with good Bokeh. However it might be rare, and you can try the 35/1.8 FX Nano, the image quality is better for that lens

You mean this lens: ?
http://www.nikon.com.sg/en_SG/product/nikkor-lenses/fx-format/single-focal-length/wide-angle/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-8g-ed

 

[thegamer1907]

You mean this lens: ?
http://www.nikon.com.sg/en_SG/product/nikkor-lenses/fx-format/single-focal-length/wide-angle/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-8g-ed

Yes, that's the one. Don't get the wrong one though. There's a lens with the same specs for DX format only. Make sure you get the FX one.

Sent from my R7sf using Tapatalk

 

[RyanKhoo]

Yes, that's the one. Don't get the wrong one though. There's a lens with the same specs for DX format only. Make sure you get the FX one.

won't you find the 35mm abit wide ? thanks

 

[thegamer1907]

I dont really find 35mm too wide, and i can move in closer to the food with the lower MFD. if you have used 35mm focal range and find it too wide, then you should get something else. after all, its about personal preference.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

I prefer the 50-60mm focal length for food as I like the perspective better than 35mm. But wider lens emphasize the front item a lot while keeping some of the ambience. Not related to food, but a technique I use to get macro and the environment is to get real close to the subject with a super wide or even fisheye lens!

 

[RyanKhoo]

Thanks to all who posted and help me here.

Thanks also to a kind gentleman here (not revealing who but you know who you are)who PM me & lend me his 55mm F2.8 to play for 2 weeks. I also learnt & get confidence in using manual lens. But after using it, I find that the 55mm is not what I would have preferred.

I have also gone down to Nikon showroom to test both the 60 & 105 macro lens on my D750.

I think I am going to get the 105 for macro shots. The bokeh & blurness of the 105 is superb !

OT a bit. But this 105 is not that great for portrait as compared to my 85mm F1.8 in terms of bokeh/separation.

I tested my 85mmF1.8 at F2.8 and took the same shot with the 105mm F2.8 but the bokeh of the 105 is no where near the 85 in terms of blurness ... not sure why this is so leh ... any idea why ?

Thanks

 

[ortega]

the 105mm is designed for optimal use at macro focusing distances, there is where it truly shines

 

[Zenten]

Thanks to all who posted and help me here.

Thanks also to a kind gentleman here (not revealing who but you know who you are)who PM me & lend me his 55mm F2.8 to play for 2 weeks. I also learnt & get confidence in using manual lens. But after using it, I find that the 55mm is not what I would have preferred.

I have also gone down to Nikon showroom to test both the 60 & 105 macro lens on my D750.

I think I am going to get the 105 for macro shots. The bokeh & blurness of the 105 is superb !

OT a bit. But this 105 is not that great for portrait as compared to my 85mm F1.8 in terms of bokeh/separation.

I tested my 85mmF1.8 at F2.8 and took the same shot with the 105mm F2.8 but the bokeh of the 105 is no where near the 85 in terms of blurness ... not sure why this is so leh ... any idea why ?

Thanks

......... depends on your minimum focus distance and your depth of field .......... the nearer you are to your subject the more you are able to throw the background out of focus.

 

[RyanKhoo]

......... depends on your minimum focus distance and your depth of field .......... the nearer you are to your subject the more you are able to throw the background out of focus.

the 105mm is designed for optimal use at macro focusing distances, there is where it truly shines

Thanks ortega & Zenten,

I supposed the 105mm macro lens is first and foremost a macro lens, it is good when distance of subject is near to camera at micro distance.

So we cannot expect it to fare as well in the portrait dept as compared against the 85mm F1.8

Thanks again ...