lwheeler54

Any recommendations for a macro lens for use with D500? Maybe in the $600 range or less. Thanks for any suggestions.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

What are you planning on shooting? This will be a strong factor to consider when selecting a focal length. shorter lenses have shorter working distances, and vice versa. Most macro lenses range from very good to excellent.

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

Nikon makes several that can be used w/D500. All are very good.
https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/best-macro-lenses.htm

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Nikon Micro Nikkor 105MM or Nikon Micro Nikkor 200MM depending upon the distance you want to be away from your subjects.

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

Look at the 90mm to 105mm f2.8 macro lenses.
Just about every manufacturer makes one in that range.
Tamron and Sigma both have macro lenses in that range and in your $600 budget.

saxman71 Loc: Wenatchee

You may be able to find a used 105mm, f/2.8 Nikon lens for under $600. A new one will likely cost more. For under $600 you may have to look at third party lenses. I own a Sigma 105mm, f/2.8 lens that I purchased a few months ago. It works fine and cost a tad under $500. I've posted some pictures I have taken with it here on UHH. Feel free to take a look if you would like to see some examples. Here's one link: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-640268-1.html

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

I use a Nikon 60mm f/2.8 G MicroAF-S FX on my D500 and other Nikon bodies. IQ is excellent and can get up to 1:1 at about 7" from subject. I see them used for $300 to $400 in excellent condition and you wouldn't go wrong with it. Other very good options are the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 DX AF-S and Nikon 105mm f/2.8 FX AF-S. You can get the 85mm new in the $500 range with at 1:1 at about 11". The 105mm is more expensive and I don't see any used online right now. Another very good micro is the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro, which is now on sale new for $469, which is $500 off. That's a great deal for a great lens.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

The Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 micro comes fairly close to your price point. It will provide reasonable working distances for a lot of subjects, and the price new appears to be about $517. I like the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR better, because it provides somewhat longer working distances and image stabilization, but it is closer to $900 new. Used might be closer to your budget. Note that these are both full frame lenses, so they will work with whatever camera you might buy in the future. There is also a Nikkor 40mm DX Micro, but I have no experience with it, nor with the 200mm Nikkor. I can tell you that both the 60 and 105mm lenses are useful as very nice general purpose lenses, I have used the 105mm as an "all day" lens more than once with nice results.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

Tokina makes a 100mm macro that is outstanding and fits your budget. Look at it before you decide. The nikon is great but far more expensive.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I have the 60mm, used with a DX camera. I do find the working distance can be only a couple inches at maximum magnification, and I've had to remove the lens hood to get as close as I want. Otherwise, I am very happy with it. If I had known though I might have looked for a used 105.

JRiepe Loc: Southern Illinois

I use a 180mm Tamron lens for greater working distance. It has been discontinued but Keh has one in excellent condition for $463.20. In auto focus it is very slow. The Tokina 100mm is around $400. I've seen great shots with the Sigma 105mm. Macro is a different ballgame. With small apertures for greater DOF you may need off camera lighting. I always used two SB600's with a macro flash bracket but downsized to a Nissin ring light. I prefer the ring light for greater maneuverability in tight areas and also much lighter.

NaturePher Loc: Happy Valley

Nikon has factory refurbished sales every few months. I picked up The latest model Nikon 105 f 2.8 for $629, which normally has a refurb price of $699. Regular price was running with retail discounts around $809 but recently increased to around $899. After research of Macro lens reviews, and looking at many Macro pictures and their associated Exif data, the Nikon 105 won my heart. Tested the lens and lives up expectations. Well built and very crisp images edge to edge. The tina stamens from Begonias were perfect. Suggest you compare published tests of different models. Perhaps you do not need VR or autofocus. Older models can be had for much less. Enjoy the hunt!!

cjstanley

The general trend on the site is to the "latest and greatest" so this may not be a popular suggestion.

An old manual focus macro lens may serve you quite well. The Vivitar Series 1 macro in 105mm is a great lens as are examples from Tokina, Lester Dine, etc. Give one a try. You may find what you want without spending a small fortune.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Yes, I would strongly suggest the Nikon AF Micro Nikkor 105mm 2.8 D lens, now, this lens will not auto focus on the new Z's, but it is in your price range and it is very, very, very sharp.
Below is a image of my lens and the second one is just a general shot with it.
You should be able to get a good price for mint off of ebay below your budget, and, did I mention, it's a great lens.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1311.R4.TR7.TRC1.A0.H0.XNikon+af+micro+nikkor+105.TRS0&_nkw=nikon+af+micro+nikkor+105+2.8+d&_sacat=0

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

No need to worry about a brand name as they are all optimized for close in focusing. I have 9 different true macro lenses (some lenses are labeled as macro but are not true macros). Some are AF, others are MF. They run the gauntlet from Nikon, to Sigma, Tamron, Vivitar, Lester Dine, Spiratone, etc. I don't use the AF or VR on ant of them as those features become less effective the closer one gets to a life-sized image. Nor do I use a tripod (unless in the studio stacking images). The suggestion of a 90-105 range is the best compromise as it gives you more distance between your lens and the subject. Shorter puts you closer and longer means the lens gets longer and heavier and more expensive. With your camera, you can utilize the older manual focus lenses as well. You will still be able to meter in "M" and "A" modes. I shoot almost exclusively in entirely manual myself and my go-to macro lens is an older (1980's) Lester Dine 105mm F2.8 macro. Unless you intend to shoot a lot of other than macro shots with the lens, the AF and VR can be ignored...See below for a sample of what can be captured with that manual focus lens...Oh, and peruse the "True Macro" and "Close Up" forums here for more info...

DSC_8892 by Scott, on Flickr