Recommend a macro lense

paul14086

Senior Member
Hey guys. Sorry if this has been asked previously.
I have been looking for a cheap way of doing macro photography for a while. I have brought extension tubes that you can control aperture etc and also tried reverse rings. They do work alright but I'm wanting to get a actually marco lense. I have been suggested the tamron sp 90mm 2.8
I'm not super cluie on macro lenses etc. But would this be a decent start on my d3200? ?
I have found something in my price range and was wondering your thoughts?
I know it doesn't have vibration reduction which will make it interesting

Tamron SP AF90mm F/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 Lenses :: Tamron :: Lenses - eGlobaL Digital Cameras Online Store

Mu budget is up to around $400-$500
Thanks guys
 

weebee

Senior Member
Everything I've heard about this lenses is positive. What type of macro are you going to do? What subject matter is what I mean.
 

J-see

Senior Member
That's the older version of Tam's 90mm macro. You'd have to check if it AF on your cam else it is manually only. For macro that is less of a problem but when you use it as a normal 90mm auto-focus is handy.

It's not the sharpest of what's available but the differences are not that great. You have to decide if you want the cheaper one or maybe wait a bit more until you can buy a better version.
 

Scott Murray

Senior Member
Here are some shots taken tonight, and for those saying it is not sharp well I will let my photos speak for themselves.


This was taken with just the 90mm Tamron and speedlight/diffuser.

Untitled by Scott H Murray, on Flickr

This is one of the rare times I used auto focus as I was balancing on the A frame of my dogs kennel and was holding the camera with one hand while trying not to fall off. Froggy was out hunting.

by Scott H Murray, on Flickr

This spider does not know colours apparently as it does not blend in. In saying that it was very dark and when focusing manually all I could make out were the stripes on its legs.

by Scott H Murray, on Flickr

And here are some flies enjoying sleeping on my Aloe vera where the spider was hunting. I dare say they will be spider food.

by Scott H Murray, on Flickr
 

weebee

Senior Member
Nothing wrong with those pictures Scott. Here is one that I took with my second hand 60.00 Sigma.

DSC_7314.jpg
 

Eyelight

Senior Member
You may already know, but one thing to consider is the working distance of the lens, in other words the minimum focus distance which at each focal length for 1:1 lenses gives the same view.

40mm = 160mm +/-
85mm = 280mm +/-
105mm = 310mm +/-
200mm = 500mm +/-

These are the Nikon numbers but other brands will be similar. Each of these would deliver the same close-up shot.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
I have the sigma 105 without VR and I have to agree with Scott that you do not need VR with a macro lens (OK maybe 95% or the time).
 

Eyelight

Senior Member
I can see not needing VR when using flash, but would think anything that can allow closing an aperture down in Macro is a good thing.

My Macro does not have VR, but working this through in my mind, let's say I'm shooting the 90mm handheld at 1/200 and f/5.6. Assuming the advertised 3-4 stop advantage of VR, I could change to 1/50 and f/11 or 1/25 and f/16 or maybe even 1/10 and f/22. OK, don't think I could hold the last one with the 10th generation VR, but you get the idea.

So, 'xplain to me why VR would not be a benefit.

I suppose I do agree that VR is never a necessity, but seems it could be nice.
 

J-see

Senior Member
Most macros can be used as a portrait lens in which case VR is nice. I haven't got VR on mine and never really needed it for macro but once I start shooting normally with it, it would have been a handy option. Especially since mine is rather long. I don't know how good VR for macro is since I never shot it but I can image that it helps since at 1:1 the slightest shake magnifies exponentially.

It's the same with manual vs auto-focus. On the D3300 I always manually focused mine when macro. Not that I had another option. But again, when shooting normal, manual can be annoying.

It's handy to have the options which can always be disabled. But you can't enable what isn't there.
 

Blade Canyon

Senior Member
I got a used Nikon 105mm 2.8 VR Macro lens off Craigslist for $500, the top of your spending range.

_D800677c.jpg
 

Attachments

  • _D800677a.jpg
    _D800677a.jpg
    64.5 KB · Views: 80

paul14086

Senior Member
Thanks for your input guys. It will be mostly for bugs and flowers etc. I'm use to manually focusing for marco, but will I be able to auto focus with the d3200?
 

J-see

Senior Member
Thanks for your input guys. It will be mostly for bugs and flowers etc. I'm use to manually focusing for marco, but will I be able to auto focus with the d3200?

I know I couldn't focus my AF lens on the D3300 since it has no motor to drive the lens. I suppose the D3200 lacks that too. If the Tamron requires a motor I would not know. It says AF for the lens but I'm not sure if Tamron follows the same principles with those abbreviations.
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
I have the Tamron 90mm - the exact one mentioned in your original post and after much struggling (the depth of field is very narrow in macro photography) I am finally getting a handle on it.
While it does have AF I find it is easier and better to manually focus (I think Scott will tell you the same thing)

Here is one of my images

Nature's Bride.jpg
 

J-see

Senior Member
While it does have AF I find it is easier and better to manually focus (I think Scott will tell you the same thing)

Your cam has a focus motor inside if I'm not mistaken which can drive any lens but the question is if the lens can be focused without. For Nikon it requires AF-S lenses but I'm not sure about the Tamron. I know for certain my D3300 can't auto-focus Nikon AF lenses.
 

Eyelight

Senior Member
I believe the Tamron 90mm referenced needs a body with motor to AF. And I'm not Tamron expert, but thinking the designations USD or PZD indicate a lens with internal focus motor.
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
Your cam has a focus motor inside if I'm not mistaken which can drive any lens but the question is if the lens can be focused without. For Nikon it requires AF-S lenses but I'm not sure about the Tamron. I know for certain my D3300 can't auto-focus Nikon AF lenses.
[MENTION=31330]J-see[/MENTION] This is not true. Well sort of not true

My camera might have a focus motor inside but I only got the D7100 2 days ago. The image shown here was taken with my D5100 (see exif info) which as far as I know does not have a focus motor.
 
Top