Macro dilemma

Allen

Senior Member
Hello all,

I am a new participant, and look forward to learning, as well as perhaps contributing.

As the subject indicates, I do have a question that I hope to receive some guidance on......

as a relatively new D7000 owner, currently using an 18-200 walk-around lens, I would really like to get into macro. In searching around the web there is naturally a plethora of information.....perhaps too much. I am not particularly interested in bug photography, but flowers, textures, etc does. I expect to do a fair amount of hand held, but eventually use a tripod. I am stumped which way to go....60mm Nikkor, 90mm Tamron, 105mm Nikkor, 100mm Tokina......Ahhhh!

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
thanks, and Happy New Year.
 

piperbarb

Senior Member
I have the AF 105 f/2.8 micro Nikkor (back from my F4 days). I love it. Great closeup photos without having to be on top of your subject. I also will use it as an all-purpose short telephoto lens. I have had great results with that lens for over 20 years.

Forgot to say, I am using it on a D3000 currently.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
Get the real big expensive one :)

I'm in the same dilema and will end up with the Nikon 105. Since you have a Dx, I would go for the Nikon 60mm or if you need a lot of room, the 105mm. There is a new Tamron that just came out (preorder only) which looks good also.
 

Mike150

Senior Member
I have the Nikon 105mm and love it. I went that way because I don't have to get too close. Besides... Butterfly's have bad breath so you need to stay back a little bit.
 

Just-Clayton

Senior Member
I have the 85mm macro and I have enjoyed it. _DSC3455.JPGDSC_0041 (800x533).jpg
 
Last edited:

Mike150

Senior Member
Newb gave me this Idea. One of my favorite reasons for getting the 105

Widow-1.jpg

Actually, the Black widow is a very docile critter. I was able to get to about 18 inches from her without disturbing her web. A co-worker had just gotten her D7000 and opted to use her 70-300 and stood about 6 feet away to get similar shots. Her method had a lot deeper depth of field but we both got good shots. I went back the next day with a bunch of different lighting setups but building maintenance had cleared the entire nest and killed everything.
 

Pierro

Senior Member
Allen, to be honest, it looks like you may just need a lens with close up ability.

If you're not interested in snapping the eyes of a spider, or hairs on a caterpillar, you dont really need a proper macro lens. True macros are generally quality lenses, which you will pay some decent coin for. There are regular lenses out there that have a close ability, and more than good enough to snap flowers / insects, and will cost a lot less
 

Allen

Senior Member
Thanks for all the replies; quite a range of suggestions.....
@Pierro, While theoretically you are correct, I did borrow a d version of the Nikkor 60 and lots of fun with it. You cannot get even close to 1:1 without a real macro.
@Newb, I did look closely (sorry the pun) at the 85, and I would rather have a little more speed (aperture) potential.
@Rick, Yeah, that is the dilemma....60, 105 or Tokina 100 or Tamron 90...what are the compromises.....
@Piper, @Rick, It does seem that there is some logic if there is doubt, go with a known winner - 105 Nikkor

I suppose part of what I am seeking is guidance in the factors of the compromise.....
 

Rick M

Senior Member
One of the things that keeps me from third party lenses is the higher frequency of "bad copies" and resale value. I've never lost much selling a used nikon lens. The other thing is I get a bit obsessed with knowing I have the best tool available. I would rather wait longer and pay the 200-300 more for the best tool. I'm not saying the 3rd party choices aren't good, but then again, why is everyone comparing against the Nikon offering?
 

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Hi Allen and welcome to the forum. The good thing about macro lenses is that they are all sharp. Macro lens focus much slower compared to your typical lens and in most cases, a tripod is necessary to get the sharpest possible image especially at macro 1:1 ratio.

You did not mentioned your budget which is always the big factor when you ask for suggestions.

I used to own the Tamron 90mm f2.8 (screw-drive type) which was ok for my use at the time since I don't shoot macro all the time. It comes and goes. I currently have the Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR micro lens which is pretty bulky (fat) but has great optics and faster AF. There are some lenses that I own which doesn't get used much depending on my mood so plan carefully and try not to spend too much if this is something temporary.

The Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro lens is also another great lens which gives you more working distance when shooting bugs that could sting. Once spring time comes up, that maybe the best time to break out my macro lens.
 

nzswift

Senior Member
Have you thought about the fact that AF is pretty much useless if you are doing macro. You should know what parts of the image you want in focus. Manual Nikkor lenses typically focus to 1:2 and with an extension ring to 1:1. They have a gorgeous accurate feel to the focusing throw. Consider a 55mm/f2.8 (will be about 80mm on a D7000) which is quite a good working distance or a 105mm/2.8 (155mm on D7000) which should keep you well away from any nasty bugs. The old manual "film" (FX) lenses are considerably cheaper than the modern AF lenses and optically you are in full control!
 

Allen

Senior Member
@Glen, Yes, budget is always a factor. My thinking is if there seemed to be an overwhelming consensus to go with the Nikkor 105 (the most expensive by far) then I would seriously consider it. That being said if I can spend less and what I 'give up' is minor or not noticeable....
@nz, I agree that AF is pretty much a 'get it close' function for macro, then fine focus manually....an important factor in the decision process.

Clearly, the new Tamron 90 is a potential if it is available and reviews are positive, as is the Tokina 100, Nikkor 60 and 105....unless I missed additional candidates....again thanks for the suggestions - much appreciated.
 

Mike150

Senior Member
Just an additional thought (for those of a tight budget).
Investigate using Extension tubes, or if you have a prime, try getting a lens reversal mount. I've never tried either of these but have heard good stories about them.
 

Pierro

Senior Member
Thanks for all the replies; quite a range of suggestions.....
@Pierro, While theoretically you are correct, I did borrow a d version of the Nikkor 60 and lots of fun with it.

You cannot get even close to 1:1 without a real macro.


In answer to the first part....

Yeah Allen, I'm sure its plenty fun, and no one says you have to shoot the eyelashes on a bugs eye. Just the sharpness of a macro lens make them worth having. Having said that, some macros do not like distance work. I had a Panagor f2.8 90mm manual focus, true 1:1 lens, and it was hopeless for anything other than close work

In answer to the second part..

Actually you can :)
 

Pierro

Senior Member
Just an additional thought (for those of a tight budget).
Investigate using Extension tubes, or if you have a prime, try getting a lens reversal mount. I've never tried either of these but have heard good stories about them.

Both work fine
 

aZuMi

Senior Member
If you're not ready for a dedicated Macro or wouldn't want to spend hundreds of dollars yet. You can always try Macro extension tubes. The 12mm will give you at least 1:1 reproductive ratio and you can still use your current lenses.
 

piperbarb

Senior Member
A couple of summers ago, a student brought me a cicada that he found crawling around outside. I photographed it using the AF 105 f/2.8 micro Nikkor. I did manual focus so I could select the areas I wanted in focus. I did not use flash but filtered sunlight (thus the relatively small depth of field). Yes, you can see the hairs on its legs. I made 8x10 prints of the cicada and used it as part of a biology lab activity.DSC_0640-small.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0640.JPG
    DSC_0640.JPG
    1.2 MB · Views: 65

Allen

Senior Member
Well, went and done it. While out today, stopped by local camera store (yes, there are some still left), and bought the Nikkor 105. It is a spectacular lens! Can't wait to get out and use it.

Thanks again for suggestions, advice and patience.

Allen
 
Top