Nikon Macro Options on a Tight Budget?

spongo

spongo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
69
Name
Jon
Edit My Images
No
Hi guys,
I am looking to make a start in macro and I'm on a very tight budget. I am looking at the Tamron SP 90 and we'll be using it on an F65 and D90. The 35mm body is only a temporary measure to get me through a photography course, I will however be keeping the lens for my D90 after the course is finished.

How does this lends stand-up as a choice? As far as I can see, at a budget of around £100 it is the only real contender. I am really not bothered about AF for macro but at this budget are there any other choices that I am not seeing that can reproduce in 1:1?

Also does anyone else shoot with this lens mounted on the D90? I'd love to have an opinion on its ability. I'd love to see some alternatives if there are any that will be worth looking at.

Thanks :thumbs:
Jon.
 
You might be able to get a Sigma 50mm f/2.8 1:1 macro which is a nice lens but a little short on the focal length if you're shooting insects or suchlike (certainly on the F65).
 
For clarity, I'm talking about the old manual version of the SP 90.
 
Personally, I reckon the extra you'll pay for an AF version is worth it - not so much for the AF in Macro use but for use just as a 90mm short telephoto lens and the electronic aperture control. My old copy is screw driven but IIRC, the D90 has an AF motor in the body and I know the F65 does!
 
Personally I'd get a raynox D250 macro adapter or extension tubes and save for a proper dedicated macro lens.
 
I used to own the 50mm Sigma and used it on my D90 - it was very nice and if you don't need the extra stop of speed a good alternative to the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 if you don't already have that. However, it was too short on my D700 so I sold it (£120 I think).

I now have a Tamron 90mm (alright, I "borrowed" it from work and forgot to give it back) and it is a cracking lens. I don't think the optical formula has changed since the manual version so I would expect the SP90 to be fantastic too.

All in all, I think if you want a dedicated lens to do macro with then the SP90 is the one (you really don't need AF for macro) but if you want a useful lens that happens to do 1:1 macro then the Sigma is a good choice.
 
The adaptall is a lovely lens though. If you're happy with a manual focus, then it also makes a great fastish portrait lens.
 
James J said:
Personally I'd get a raynox D250 macro adapter or extension tubes and save for a proper dedicated macro lens.
Click to expand...

I've got the Hoya 4x, 2x, 1x filter set already but I need to get a lens for the F65 so I figured on getting something I could use going forwards maybe. I like the fact that I could have a body set up for macro/portrait just there, ready to go. Plus I have to do a proportion of my shooting in 35mm for the course.
 
So would I be right in thinking that the Sigma 50 and the Tam sp90 are the only real 1:1 contenders on this budget (£100 give or take)?
 
spongo said:
So would I be right in thinking that the Sigma 50 and the Tam sp90 are the only real 1:1 contenders on this budget (£100 give or take)?
Click to expand...

I paid £70 for my nikon 105mm f/4 micro. It's 1:2 but £10 spent on extension tubes solves that. Cracking lens.

Also had the sigma 50mm a while ago. That's a lovely lens too but you have to work hard with your lighting with just 50mm.
 
Before I had my 105mm micro I used Meike AF macro extension tubes with my D90. I used them with an 80-200 and a 17-50. Both gave excellent results, though I found only one of the rings would work well with the 17-50, it just focused in too close otherwise.

With a humble 50mm they are excellent. You get a little over 1:1 with all 3 rings attached [68mm total] They're plastic, but solid. They work every bit as good as the pricier Kenko versions [the kenko ones are about 3x the price]

I got them on Amazon for £50 or so. [edit] They're £59: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-Fo...1_fkmr0_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1350683663&sr=8-3-fkmr0

And worth every penny I'd say. They work with most lenses, even kit lenses or old manual lenses. Best use without the AF, it does work, but it's a little sluggish. But even with dedicated macro lenses most people shoot their macro in manual.
 
Last edited:
The tubes sound interesting? I've got 3 lenses...

35 f1.8
18-70 f3.5-4.5
70-300 f/4.5-5.6 vr

Which of these would lend themselves most naturally to being combined with the tubes? I'm guessing the 18-70 but the 70-300 has vr?
 
The 18-70 probably, in around the 50mm mark on it. I'd say the 70-300 would work well too, better at the 70mm end. At 300mm you will be able to focus from further back but you won't be getting 1:1, but a good close up.

I'm not sure if VR works with them. Focusing is best done the old set manual focus to as close as you desire, thenit's move back and forward to get critical focus before snapping.
 
I saw a set of those kenko af's go for £70 on here a couple of days ago...... Certainly got me thinking.
 
Have you thought of the Vivitar/Cosina 100mm f3.5 popular a few years ago?

Popular a few years ago, 'Fisher Price ' plastic construction, BUT optically very good, I've used one with great success in the past - check out eBay as very cheap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top