What Macro lens for Nikon?

rob-nikon

rob-nikon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,077
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm thinking of getting a macro lens as I'm interested in trying to learn more about macro photography. I'm about to thin my kit down as I've decided to let a couple of lenses I don't use go. The macro lens I've researched so far are:

Nikon AF-S 85mm f3.5 G ED VR DX Micro

Nikon AF-S 60mm f2.8 Micro

Nikon AF-S 105mm f2.8 G ED-IF VR Micro

The budget is about £500-600 max and I don't mind either brand new or second hand. I don't mind third party lens either. I will be keeping a Nikon 50mm f1.8 so I'm swaying towards the 105mm as it could double as a good longer low light portrait lens too. I use a Nikon D7000 at present, but I'm not sure about a DX lens as I'm thinking of moving to FX in a year or two, investing in good FX glass now may be a good idea.

Any advice would be very appreciated, thanks Rob.
 
60f2.8 is useful for handholding on a DX body giving the equivalent of 90mm

The 105 will give you a better working distance, many people (some on here have) often buy the short version to begin with then realise they've made a mistake and later opt for the 105.

I guess it boils down to what shots you'd like to take. i do alot of flowers and the 60mm works very well for me.

If i was shooting smaller objects the 105 would be something I'd go for.

Haven't got any experience of the 85 guess it's almost in between the two though if in the future you'll be going FX I'd go for the 105

Hope that helps
 
As a third party lens have you considered the Sigma 105 macro? Personally I think that a 60 or 85 might require getting too close to the subject so I would go for a 105mm or longer. I have the Sigma 105 and it is excellent (although I hardly use it as macro work is too difficult for me!). It was very useful as a longer lens on holiday however and incredibly sharp. I have some taken with the 105 on my Flickr (no macros on there though I can send you a few macro images if you wanted to see them as I am sure I have a few saved off the computer). I think the 105 Sigma is a lens which will work on an FX camera.
 
Last edited:
Rob.

I had the 105mm VR and used it for exactly what you want to.

I LOVED it! It is faultless. In terms of macro, wonderful - just what you expect.

Portrait - it over delivers. Fast AF (I shot ice hockey and gigs with this lens!) And everything else you need from a good portrait lens.

I seriously couldn't recommend it enough and I've been wanting to buy it again for a while (I sold it as I wanted a 400mm lens at the time).
 
Sigma 150mm f2.8 for me. Blinding lens, needs some effort to get hand holding right but has a better working distance.
 
Sigma have an improved os version of their 105mm macro. I almost bought it but after reading numerous comparisons opted for the Nikon 105 used. Cost me about the same as a new sigma. Either one will do a brill job, it's just personal preference. The sigma is apparently sharper, but slower and noisier.
 
chivers67 said:
The 105 will give you a better working distance, many people (some on here have) often buy the short version to begin with then realise they've made a mistake and later opt for the 105.
Click to expand...

This is the one thing I worry, I want to buy right first time. I feel the 60mm will be too short for me and 85mm is a DX lens so I would need to sell it once I move to FX. I don't want to purchase either then later sell it and buy the 105mm.

I think I will be mainly taking flowers at first then moving on to insects, my main photography passion is wildlife/animals so it's a nature progression.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the replies. It's confirmed my gut feeling that the 105mm is the one to go for. I'm going to look at the sigma too as that's quite interesting. Had a look at the two groups on Flickr and there are some great images on both.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
Rob.

I had the 105mm VR and used it for exactly what you want to.

I LOVED it! It is faultless. In terms of macro, wonderful - just what you expect.

Portrait - it over delivers. Fast AF (I shot ice hockey and gigs with this lens!) And everything else you need from a good portrait lens.

I seriously couldn't recommend it enough and I've been wanting to buy it again for a while (I sold it as I wanted a 400mm lens at the time).
Click to expand...

That all sounds great, if its great for macro and portraits, especially ice hockey where the AF needs to be fast, that sells it for me. Sounds a great lens for both. Now i need to have a look about to see if I can find a great second hand one before going new. Thanks for the advice.
 
The 105mm is brilliant for macro -and more. I occasionally use it for equestrian shots, and as others have said the AF is great.
 
Be warned though, the AF is nowhere near amazing in poor light, the Nikon 105mm hunts like a mad thing at times. Especially when doing close ups. For outdoor, general shooting or portraits, fast as you like. For macro, ideally you'll be using off cam flash anyhow.
 
Cagey75 said:
Be warned though, the AF is nowhere near amazing in poor light, the Nikon 105mm hunts like a mad thing at times. Especially when doing close ups. For outdoor, general shooting or portraits, fast as you like. For macro, ideally you'll be using off cam flash anyhow.
Click to expand...

I've got a sb700 i could use for off camera flash so hopefully it should be ok. Do you know how many well the AF compares to the 50mm f1.8 as that's the only other lens Ive got that I could compare it too.
 
rob-nikon said:
I've got a sb700 i could use for off camera flash so hopefully it should be ok. Do you know how many well the AF compares to the 50mm f1.8 as that's the only other lens Ive got that I could compare it too.
Click to expand...

The 50mm 1.8D? Or G? I've never owned the G version. But I remember the old D version being very sluggish at times. the 105 is sluggish at times too, trust me. It hunts like mad, like it gets confused as to what you're trying to focus on. Look up YouTube videos on it for actual proof.
 
I think it depends what body you're using the D lens on as it will only be as fast as the built in screw drive motor can drive it plus only as accurate as that body's inbuilt AF system.
I always found mine fast enough on both a D200 & a D2XS :)
 
Tirpitz said:
I think it depends what body you're using the D lens on as it will only be as fast as the built in screw drive motor can drive it plus only as accurate as that body's inbuilt AF system.
I always found mine fast enough on both a D200 & a D2XS :)
Click to expand...

I had it on the D200. It wasn't mad slow, but noisy as hell.
 
Last edited:
Just a quick update, I ended up getting a Sigma 105mm f2.8 macro OS from Mifsuds. Thanks for all your help, I read some more reviews and the sigma came out very well. Just need to try it out and get some photos. Im going to enjoy learning macro, Im surprised at how small DoF can be but it should produce some interesting images. Only problem is its shown me how dirty my sensor is! I rarely go about f8 for wildlife shots so learning sensor cleaning is the next thing I need to do. Thanks again for the advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top