Macro Lens Help

M

Mark F

Senior Member
Moab Man said:
Unless you have an older 90mm I'm unfamiliar with, the Tamron 90mm will work with his D3100 per it has a focus motor. Tried it out on my D5100 after playing with it on my D7100.

This lens: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di 1:1AF Macro Lens for Nikon AF AF272NII700

Doing a littler further digging - it looks like at one time it did not have the focusing motor. It does now though.
Click to expand...

I do have the older version... I stand corrected then. Didn't know the newer model had a focus motor. Although I use it on my d600 so that doesn't matter. I do however manual focus on macros. More accurate


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
M

Moab Man

Senior Member
Mark F, just so you know, it wasn't a gotcha thing. I too had thought the lens I bought (apparently the updated Tamron 90mm) would only work with my D7100.
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
fluorescentsam said:
okay, thanks. could you guys give your opinion on the Nikon Micro 40mm f/2.8g AF-S DX
Click to expand...
40mm will be ok for flowers but I don't think its long enough for insects. But I could be wrong, even my 90mm isn't long enough for insects and requires cropping in, even with the Raynox DCR-250. You would be better putting the Raynox on a 50mm lens if you have one.
Also have a read through this - http://nikonites.com/macro/16771-macro-lens-comparison.html

Feel free to check out my Flickr for macro examples.
 
Last edited:
F

fluorescentsam

Senior Member
well i have a kit 18-55mm nikkor lens which i am going to put a raynox on while i save for a macro so if i got a macro, i could put the raynox on it couldn't i?
 
J

Just-Clayton

Senior Member
I use the 85mm/3.5 macro dx. It has produced great shots and didn't break my wallet too bad. Very light weight and middle distance for bugs and flowers.
 
F

fluorescentsam

Senior Member
Scott Murray said:
Well I would say try and get the longest 'macro' lens you can afford, I wouldn't go for the tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD as I have heard its pretty soft from 200-300.
Click to expand...

okay, on a budget of 150-200 pounds, do you have any recommendations? and what about either of these?
Nikon | Imaging Products | AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8DSigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro For Nikon Digital & Film: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photothanks [URL="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-70-300mm-Nikon-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012X43P2/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1387066525&sr=8-4&keywords=macro+lens+nikon"]
[/URL]
 
Scott Murray

Scott Murray

Senior Member
fluorescentsam said:
okay, on a budget of 150-200 pounds, do you have any recommendations? and what about either of these?
Nikon | Imaging Products | AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8DSigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro For Nikon Digital & Film: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photothanks
Click to expand...

For Versatility I would go the 70-300 but its only a 1:4 ratio, you can fit the Raynox onto it to achieve closer results too.
The 60mm is 1:1 and adding the Raynox would give you greater than that. But ultimately the choice is yours.
 
J

Just-Clayton

Senior Member
The 70-300 will not be sharp. The 60mm on the 3100 will only work manually. The 60 and my 85 are around the same price. I also use my 85mm as a portrait and auto focuses on the 3100. But, the the 60mm has an f2.8 and the 85mm has f3.5. The 60 can use less light. So, it does depend on the money and usage.
 
Top