Macro lens for Nikon

rookies

rookies

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,064
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
What macro lens people using on their nikons pls

Am torn between the Nikon 105mm VR which got £90 cash back. Or a sigma.
 
nikon if image quality is what your after which should be your main priority when buying a lens for macro it also doubles as a good portrait lens
dont touch 3rd party lens's with a barge pole im talking through experiance
 
rookies said:
What macro lens people using on their nikons pls

Am torn between the Nikon 105mm VR which got £90 cash back. Or a sigma.
Click to expand...


If it's of any help Andrew, I use a "Micro Nikkor 105mm 2.8D" and it's a superlative lens.

However you would find that virtually all of the well known makes of macro lens are very good and a considerable saving on cost over the Nikon unit. Several people in the macro section use the Sigma with superb results as do some people with the Tamron or Tokina units.

There is also a new kid on the block under the name of Venus which is a fully manual lens which focuses down to 2-1 of which several guys are using with excellent results.

Hope this helps.,

George.
 
Thanks

Think I be going Nikon as a like use it as a portrait lens too with it VR
 
holty said:
nikon if image quality is what your after which should be your main priority when buying a lens for macro it also doubles as a good portrait lens
dont touch 3rd party lens's with a barge pole im talking through experiance
Click to expand...
Load of rubbish.

The Sigma 105mm OS is better than the Nikon and Canon equivalents, and costs a few hundred pounds less.

No surprises when it came out on top when reviewed against them on release, and it's certainly the best macro lens I've ever used.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Load of rubbish.

The Sigma 105mm OS is better than the Nikon and Canon equivalents, and costs a few hundred pounds less.

No surprises when it came out on top when reviewed against them on release, and it's certainly the best macro lens I've ever used.
Click to expand...

+1

holty said:
dont touch 3rd party lens's with a barge pole im talking through experiance
Click to expand...

Don't know which is worse in this statement the fact this is a load of rubbish or the fact you can't even spell experience? :D
 
Last edited:
rookies said:
Thanks

Think I be going Nikon as a like use it as a portrait lens too with it VR
Click to expand...
Don't buy the Nikon (unless you ***really*** have to have the badge!)

Get the Sigma OS, you'll get as good, if not slightly better IQ for a lot less.

Amazon have them at a very reasonable price with a 3 year warranty, it's a no brainer.
 
Last edited:
Jim is right the new model Sigma 105 is excellent and probably the best choice at the moment
all of the currently available macro lenses are excellent though and I doubt if you could see any difference in image quality between them with real life shots
I would go for the Sigma though and put the money saved towards a flash gun and maybe a tripod
I have the older version Sigma 105 and 150 and the Canon 100L and I can't tell any difference in image quality between them with shots of insects
the 100mm macro lenses are easier to handhold than longer lenses such as the Sigma 150mm
 
Is the sigma fast at AF for portraits as this is a feature I like too
 
rookies said:
Is the sigma fast at AF for portraits as this is a feature I like too
Click to expand...
No macro lens has fast AF, the AF on macro lenses is engineered for smoothness rather than speed, and most people use them in MF mode anyway.

But why would you need fast AF for portraits when your subject is pretty much static?

The Sigma is a stunning portrait lens, and the AF is more than good enough!
 
Last edited:
buy used you will get better value

the resale value of the Nikon is probably better

I have the Nikon - no complaints - I use it as much for general photography as for macro, it is a good people/portrait lens - very sharpe and well built
 
Last edited:
G.K.Jnr. said:
If it's of any help Andrew, I use a "Micro Nikkor 105mm 2.8D" and it's a superlative lens.

However you would find that virtually all of the well known makes of macro lens are very good and a considerable saving on cost over the Nikon unit. Several people in the macro section use the Sigma with superb results as do some people with the Tamron or Tokina units.

There is also a new kid on the block under the name of Venus which is a fully manual lens which focuses down to 2-1 of which several guys are using with excellent results.

Hope this helps.,

George.
Click to expand...

What this Man says... Venus is the sharpest of the lot. :D
 
Tintin124 said:
That won't have anything to do with Sharpness lol plus why do you think he wants it so much ??!!!??
Click to expand...

I'm sure I'll get a "sharpe" reply

It looks like the Venus can also be used other than for macro
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
I'm sure I'll get a "sharpe" reply

It looks like the Venus can also be used other than for macro
Click to expand...

All macro lens can bar the MPE which is a sole purpose Macro lens. 100mm are very good portrait lens too.
 
Note for OP - the Venus is manual focus only - (if you want to use it for other purposes), plus obviously does not have VR

(plus macro photography is not at all easy - I have never taken a good macro shot - skill, patience, experience and control over the light source is also needed - probably as or more important than the lens)
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
No macro lens has fast AF, the AF on macro lenses is engineered for smoothness rather than speed, and most people use them in MF mode anyway.

But why would you need fast AF for portraits when your subject is pretty much static?

The Sigma is a stunning portrait lens, and the AF is more than good enough!
Click to expand...
Jim both the Nikon 105 VR and the Nikon AF-S 60mm have fast af, and in terms of macro lenses very fast af. I agree though for macro work most times they are used in manual mode.

I've not tried the latest Siggy, did own the previous version, and the Tokina 100mm and the Nikon 105 AFD - all had slowish AF... I now use the Nikon 60mm AFS as it meets my needs, but for true macro work I'd prefer to have longer, I'm seriously considering the Sigma 150mm as it seems to be an excellent lens and at the right price.
 
PaulButler said:
Jim both the Nikon 105 VR and the Nikon AF-S 60mm have fast af, and in terms of macro lenses very fast af. I agree though for macro work most times they are used in manual mode.

I've not tried the latest Siggy, did own the previous version, and the Tokina 100mm and the Nikon 105 AFD - all had slowish AF... I now use the Nikon 60mm AFS as it meets my needs, but for true macro work I'd prefer to have longer, I'm seriously considering the Sigma 150mm as it seems to be an excellent lens and at the right price.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call the Siggy slow to AF per se, just not fast!

I've not used the Nikon macro lenses (being a Canon user) but I've used Canon Macros, including the 100L and they are on a par re speed of the Siggy but neither were "fast" as such.

But I'm comparing them to lenses with fast AF, such as sporting teles.
 
They aren't as fast as the super teles for sure, but the two I mentioned are noticeably faster than the previous siggy - easily quick enough for action shots.
 
Auto-focus always tends to be the sticking point for brands like Tamron, Sigma etc, optically they're now putting out some stuff which is superior to Canon/Nikon.

I'm curious about the Sigma 105mm and wouldn't mind comparing it to the Nikon as it's a lot cheaper although I'm a little dubious it's much better.
 
I have a little Tamron 90mm f/2.8 cheap as chips but excellent I.Q

It's great for macro and sharper than a sharp thing I probably wouldn't use it for portraits though as the a.f is slow and I have lenses for portraits so no need.
 
simonbarker said:
I'm curious about the Sigma 105mm and wouldn't mind comparing it to the Nikon as it's a lot cheaper although I'm a little dubious it's much better.
Click to expand...

I think you will find there is very little difference between IQ between all macro (1:1) lens.

It will be things such as flare/bokeh/AF that are noticeable differences.
 
Tintin124 said:
I think you will find there is very little difference between IQ between all macro (1:1) lens.

It will be things such as flare/bokeh/AF that are noticeable differences.
Click to expand...

Sure but that's actually important to me as I use it for lots besides macro.
 
I have the sigma 70mm f/2.8 on a crop sensor and use it as a jack of all trades, if I were to do just macro then I would go for the 105 or 150.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top