Just bought 105 Macro lens

D7100-79

Senior Member
I just bought 105mm Macro lens to be used with D7100, mostly for macro work at home. Is that a good choice or should I have gone with something smaller like 60mm ? Reason for long lens was to be little far from subject, especially bugs I'm trying to shoot or not to come close to lighting I'll be using for macro lens. Would love ur input. Thank you
 
Last edited:

480sparky

Senior Member
I prefer a 105 because it put the camera &lens further away from any subject I'm shooting and gives me more latitude when it comes to lighting.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Would it be too long for a DX camera I’m using tho?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nope...great choice! It will be better to focus manually. When you are close to the subject, the depth of field is sooo shallow. You might want to try f/10 or f/11 for starters. Congrats and have fun with it.
 

nickt

Senior Member
Unless you are laying stuff like coins on a table and taking shots straight down on them, 105 will be fine. I had a 60 and then I got a 105. I kept the 60 around for those tabletop shots. Otherwise I would need a step stool with the 105 to to get a shot looking directly down on the table. Outside the 105 is perfect. Even if you had a bug or flower at table height, you would likely not be looking to shoot straight down on it so the 105 won't be a problem.
 

Andy W

Senior Member
I think you made the right choice for the reasons already given. :encouragement: My wife has a 100mm macro and really likes it.
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I think you bought the ideal focal length for macro. I have a Tokina 100 2.8 that I purchased in 2011 that works great on my D7200. DX gives it a bit more reach and more DOF than shooting on my FX body. Most times I'm using a tripod, shutter release and MUP, with a small aperture (f/8 or lower). Good luck.

JFS_4824.jpg
 

480sparky

Senior Member
I think you bought the ideal focal length for macro. I have a Tokina 100 2.8 that I purchased in 2011 that works great on my D7200. DX gives it a bit more reach and more DOF than shooting on my FX body. Most times I'm using a tripod, shutter release and MUP, with a small aperture (f/8 or lower). Good luck.

The lens itself doesn't give you any more DOF. It's the fact that you must get further away from your subject to get the equivelant image compared to shooting with FX. Changing the focal point further away is what increases DOF.
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
The lens itself doesn't give you any more DOF. It's the fact that you must get further away from your subject to get the equivelant image compared to shooting with FX. Changing the focal point further away is what increases DOF.

You're right. It has nothing to do with the lens. FX, in my experience and from what I've read, has a shallower DOF than DX. Might be the sensor.
 

480sparky

Senior Member
You're right. It has nothing to do with the lens. FX, in my experience and from what I've read, has a shallower DOF than DX. Might be the sensor.

Sensors don't create DOF. They have no ability to. Only the aperture (or lens movements if you're using a shift/tilt lens) can affect DOF, all else being equal.

What changes is your physical distance from the subject when using a given lens on both FX and DX. You must move further back to get the 'same' image (perspective changes ignored here) when shooting a lens with a DX sensor. Moving further away increases the focal distance the lens is focused at, thereby increasing DOF.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
You're right. It has nothing to do with the lens. FX, in my experience and from what I've read, has a shallower DOF than DX. Might be the sensor.

I know what you are talking about, and it's been hashed out on this forum in the past. ;)
 

pforsell

Senior Member
I think you made a great choice. There's one more thing I like about 105mm (or 200mm) macro lenses over shorter ones: namely the narrow field of view. Even at the same magnification a 105mm lens will include much less clutter in the image when compared to something, say a 55mm, macro lens.
Also if you take advantage of the longer working distance and step back a little, you'll get more neutral perspective than with the shorter working distance offered by shorter lenses.
Good luck!
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
I have the 60mm and 105mm love them both.
I would not worry about the 105 on the 7200, it will be fine.
I have even found it fun and useful to use the extender (1.4 or 2.0) to the 105, my Kenko works flawlessly and I have not noticed any degradation in the image qualify.
You can also add extenders and while some say that is redundant with a macro lens, it does work and I've used it.

Have fun with this classic lens.
 

Texas

Senior Member
I've had a 105 and 90 third party macro lenses for years, now happier with the Nikon 60 (and occasionally adding my 1.5 TC).

I don't chase creepy crawlers or bugs, so I'm not a heavy into macro guy.

Suppose my biggest aggravation with the longer macro lenses was just how physically darn long they become at 1:1.

Seems several of my FF telephoto zooms have enough macro for my uses (dedicated macro mode on one zoom, and a little cropping on a couple others).
 
Top