Macro lens for Nikon

DrRusty · 3 Apr 2012

I'm tasked with sourcing a Macro lens for work and I have identified a few possible ones ovciously the 85mm and 105 offerings from Nikon priccy, although budget not comfirmed (btw it must af with D60's, D3000 and D5000 etc).

Then there is the Sigma 105mm and the well reviewed/cheaper Tamron 90 mm.

Reviews, opinons and other options welcome.

It will be used to photographing in a lab environment but true 1:1 is essential.

Thank you

Wail · 3 Apr 2012

All the ones you've identified are super sharp.

Depends what you want to shoot, is it for bugs and flying critters (ideally, you'd want longer range), or still subjects (anything would do, depending on your distance and composition)?

Some say the Tamron is sharper than the Sigma, Nikon's are all super sharp

TTK · 4 Apr 2012

IMO, I would go the Nikon way, the Nikon 105. f2.8 Macro is razor sharp.

DrRusty · 16 Apr 2012

TTK said:
IMO, I would go the Nikon way, the Nikon 105. f2.8 Macro is razor sharp.

Drat budget upto £600 just shy of the Nikon 105mm, need to find somewhere to try out the non Nikon offerings especially the Tamron.

Hutchison Haines · 16 Apr 2012

I would look at the Nikon 60mm Macro. It's a DX lens suited to the types of camera you mention, you could try renting one first if you wanted to test out the 3rd party lenses.

Beardy · 16 Apr 2012

DrRusty said:
Drat budget upto £600 just shy of the Nikon 105mm, need to find somewhere to try out the non Nikon offerings especially the Tamron.

It sells for under £500 in the classifieds on here...which is where I got mine from!

DrRusty · 17 Apr 2012

Tricky to pay for when its not my money maybe I'll have to push the budget.

Still need to try some out.

ausemmao · 17 Apr 2012

DrRusty said:
Tricky to pay for when its not my money maybe I'll have to push the budget.

Still need to try some out.

Depending on what you're shooting, you may not even need the longer macro lenses. On the other hand, the 105mm can trivially provide 2x magnification as it will take the TC-20E III.

So what will it be used for?

icnoble · 17 Apr 2012

I have a Kiron 105mm manual macro lens and it is super sharp. You can pick them up from eBay relatively cheaply

ecniv · 17 Apr 2012

sigma 150mm ? Plus some Tubes?

DrRusty · 17 Apr 2012

ausemmao said:
Depending on what you're shooting, you may not even need the longer macro lenses. On the other hand, the 105mm can trivially provide 2x magnification as it will take the TC-20E III.

So what will it be used for?

It will be used in Lab to take macro photographs of all sorts of things. We had a microscope but unless we spend £1000's it won't out perform a decent lens. Anyway the microscope was a pain to use and the DOF was always too tight.

Martin England · 17 Apr 2012

ausemmao said:
Depending on what you're shooting, you may not even need the longer macro lenses. On the other hand, the 105mm can trivially provide 2x magnification as it will take the TC-20E III.

So what will it be used for?

Interesting, has anybody used this combo? what were the results like?

ausemmao · 18 Apr 2012

DrRusty said:
It will be used in Lab to take macro photographs of all sorts of things. We had a microscope but unless we spend £1000's it won't out perform a decent lens. Anyway the microscope was a pain to use and the DOF was always too tight.

Well, from the microscope being an option I'll assume that there's not much chance of the subject moving

All modern macros work very well, so practical considerations (cost, working distance, final magnification) will be the main thing. Longer focal lengths will give you more working distance (distance between the frontmost part of the lens and the subject), which makes your setup less compact. IIRC a 60mm macro has 2" or so working distance, a 105mm 6" or so and a 200mm 12" or so (the actual distance depends on whether the front element is recessed (the Tamron 90mm has less working distance than expected because it has a massively recessed front element)

JustMe said:
Interesting, has anybody used this combo? what were the results like?

I only trialled it (will get the TC-20EIII one day). As it's a TC there's no change in working distance as there would be with tubes (which you need a lot of on a 105) and the effective max aperture drops to f/9.6, but the image that comes out seems very good (with the III, the II isn't good). I'll see if I can get an example.

allanm · 18 Apr 2012

I have had the Nikon 105mm and Tamron 90mm and to be honest, not noticed any difference in the images. Nikon AF is much quieter than the Tamron, but at 1:1, focus is critical and I only ever used it in manual.
I think the Nikon 60mm will be a little too short, you need to get the lens really close in to the subject. Ok in a lab, not so good outside.

My preference would be for the Tamron ( just sold one) as its cheaper, but if you have the budget, get the Nikon 105mm.
Allan

DrRusty · 18 Apr 2012

allanm said:
I have had the Nikon 105mm and Tamron 90mm and to be honest, not noticed any difference in the images. Nikon AF is much quieter than the Tamron, but at 1:1, focus is critical and I only ever used it in manual.
I think the Nikon 60mm will be a little too short, you need to get the lens really close in to the subject. Ok in a lab, not so good outside.

My preference would be for the Tamron ( just sold one) as its cheaper, but if you have the budget, get the Nikon 105mm.
Allan

Cheers

I'm put off a 60mm or less as you mention it would require close proximty to the subject and restrict lighting. A ring flash system may follow but lens us the first step. Although a decent tripod might be required as well.