Closeup or Macro Lens?

B

Bill16

Senior Member
I'd recommend prime macro lenses. In the Nikon brand I'd recommend the 105mm micro, and if you want auto focus the make sure you get the AF-S version. Though macro shots often require manual focusing to get it just right, so the cheaper AF 105mm f/2.8 D lens works very well too but will be manual focus on your Nikon model. :)
The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro lens seems to be a great lens too, though I've never tried one myself.
 
D

Deleted

Senior Member
The Nikon 105mm would be an excellent lens for macro, particularly if you were likely to go up to FX sensors in the future. If not, then the Nikon 85mm f/3.5G AF-S VR DX IF-ED Micro would be a good DX choice & with a lower price.
 
E

Eyelight

Senior Member
Jim McClain said:
I would like to be able to take closeups of flowers and plants, or other objects that I need to get very close to. I already have 2 decent quality zooms: AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR & AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED, but neither can be used in close quarters. The minimum focus distance for the 16-85 is 1.3', but I think it's more like 1.5'.

What prime or zoom lens would you recommend?

Thanks,

Jim
Click to expand...

Don't worry about focus distance as different focal lengths produce the same image size at different distances. The AF-S DX Micro 40, AF-S DX Micro 85 and AF-S Micro 105 all produce the same image size at the max reproduction ratio of 1:1. The main difference in these would be the working distance and the shift in DOF.

The 105mm will allow you to work from a greater distance than the 85mm or 40mm.

The 40mm will have more DOF behind the focal point than the 85mm or 105mm at the same subject size. The effect is practically imperceptible at macro focus distances, but is there.

Each of the lenses can also be used for other than close-up. The 40mm is a good near normal perspective lens, while the 85mm and 105mm work well for head shot portraits.
 
Jim McClain

Jim McClain

Senior Member
Thanks for all the responses. Seems most are recommending the 105mm, but I worry that this focal length might restrict how much of a flower grouping or small plant I can fit in the frame if I must be very close. I would have thought a 60 or 85mm might be more versatile in close quarters.

Jim
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
If your trying to get a group of flowers or a whole plant, a macro lens is not needed. It can be used like that, but a macro is made so you can get much closer to a very small subject seeing details in it that is better than the naked eye.
So do you want close up shots, or do you want macro shots? We would recommend different lenses normally for macro and just close up shots.

Jim McClain said:
Thanks for all the responses. Seems most are recommending the 105mm, but I worry that this focal length might restrict how much of a flower grouping or small plant I can fit in the frame if I must be very close. I would have thought a 60 or 85mm might be more versatile in close quarters.

Jim
Click to expand...
 
Jim McClain

Jim McClain

Senior Member
Bill16 said:
So do you want close up shots, or do you want macro shots? We would recommend different lenses normally for macro and just close up shots.
Click to expand...
I recently made some pictures of budding plants in a garden that was surrounded by fencing. I had to be inside the fence to shoot, but some of the better plants were in the first row. My D5300 would not focus or even fire the shutter, even though I was pretty sure I was at or further away than the minimum focus distance of 1.3' of my 16-85mm. It happened again when I tried to take a shot of part of a computer I am building. It leads me to believe the minimum focus distance is closer to 1.9', which I was unable to do in the garden.

I'm not interested in shooting tiny objects and making them really big. But I would like to be able to fill the frame with objects the size of your fist or forearm. Another concern is versatility too. I don't want a lens that will only be used on very rare occasions.

Thank you,

Jim
 
N

nidding

Senior Member
If you don't need to go closer than that, I would think a 35mm or 50mm f/1.8 would suit your needs perfectly. They are a whole lot cheaper than a macro lens, and at the same time you get yourself a reasonably fast prime, which is always handy. I don't own a 50, but the 35, which is also the closest to a normal lens on DX. easily fills the frame with my fist.

And did I mention that I LOVE that lens? It's just so versatile and really sharp :)
 
Last edited:
B

Bill16

Senior Member
If your stuck in too tight a space, a nikkor 40mm micro lens would be doable. But most of the time a good prime like the af-s 35mm f/1.8 lens will work awesome, and will be very good for other types of shots. :)
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
Distance will determine what mm lens is needed and rather a macro lens might be needed. For an example, I've taken shots of flowers even with my 80-400mm at 400mm and at 340mm. Your physical distance and the minimum distance of the lens will determine rather a shot is doable.


_dsc4276.jpg


_dsc4277.jpg


_dsc4280.jpg


_dsc4285.jpg
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
In those shots a minimum distance was 7' or so, and the flowers are close to that minimum distance.
So looking at the minimum distance a lens is capable of is often shorter with prime lenses I think. I'm pretty sure my 28mm prime is about a foot minimum or slightly less.
 
A

aroy

Senior Member
From objects that are at least twice the sensor size - 2 inches or more the normal kit zoom will do. In fact the new 18-55, when used at 55mm can get real close.
. Minimum focusing distance = 0.92 ft.(0.28m)
. Maximum Reproduction Ratio= 0.31x

You will find a lot of threads - of images taken at close distances with this and other lenses
http://nikonites.com/general-photography/621-post-your-flower-pics.html#axzz3CXtL1YBJ
http://nikonites.com/macro/21534-insects-non-macro-lenses.html#axzz3CXtL1YBJ
http://nikonites.com/wild-life/5623-post-your-spiders.html#axzz3CXtL1YBJ
 
B

boem

New member
I second your suspicion that, with a 105mm macro, you might from time to time be too far away for proper flower pictures; these rarely go to 1:1 magnification and at greater distance more unwanted leafs etc will be in the way.
Hence, for flowers, I would suggest using a 40mm or 60mm macro. On my d7100, I use the nikon 60mm micro with great pleasure.
 
Top