Good close up lens
Sep 24, 2021 11:22:25 #
awesome14
Loc: UK
I fully agree. Nothing can beat the Nikkor 105 f2.8 macro. But one thing that comes in really handy is a ring light flash.
Sep 24, 2021 12:06:32 #
speedmaster
Loc: Kendall, FL
A good, low cost alternative, if you don't mind manual focus is the Laowa 105 2.8, it is cheap and for the price is really good. And if you want extreme close you can add a Raynox 250. Not the most fantastic combo but pretty decent for the price if you are not looking for a professional, pristine result.
Sep 24, 2021 12:28:31 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
There are any number of very good to excellent macro lenses available...
Thomas902 is right, you may not need one. It depends upon what lenses you already have and how much magnification you actually need for whatever you want to shoot, whether macro extension rings or an auxiliary close-up lens might do the job just as well. Generally speaking, the macro rings offer the most versatility with existing lenses. The are usually best used with a short telephoto lens (say 50mm to 100mm on a D5600). I recommend the Kenko set as a very good quality, reasonably priced option at about $135. There are also other brands with similar capabilities for a bit less money. These fully support auto focus on your camera, as well as aperture control. (I do not recommend the Nikon branded macro extensions... they're high quality, but pricey and they don't fully support AF. Not to pick on Nikon... Canon's are also over priced, though they do support full functionality of the lens. In fact, most OEM tubes are over-priced... a single one can cost you as much as the full set of three from Kenko.)
A "close-up" lens attaches to the front of an existing lens to make it able to focus closer. There are cheap ones that aren't worth a damn.... and there are better quality that can be useful. Since they screw into the filter threads of the lens, so are only usable on a select lenses... not as universally usable as the macro extension tubes that fit between the lens and the camera to make the lens able to focus closer. Close-up lenses also can have some effect on image quality... additional optics always take away a little or a lot (depending upon the quality of the optics). The extension tubes use no optics at all, so have little effect. Also, close-up lenses are like adding a magnifying glass and make the lens they're mated to able to focus within a certain range. To have more versatility means having to buy several close-up filters in different strengths (just avoid the cheap sets, which are awful).
High quality "diopter" close-up lenses which use multiple elements can be pretty good.... but are pricey. Depending upon size (diameter), a single high quality close-up lens in a large size can cost as much as the Kenko set of tubes. Close-up lenses also are getting harder to find. Canon used to make a wide selection of sizes in two different strengths (so called "500D" and "250D"), but appears to have discontinued many of the sizes and now only offers a few.
There are other ways to achieve high magnification shots with your existing gear. One is called "reverse stacking". To do this a special mounting ring is used to attach one lens backward in front of another lens mounted on the camera. This is much like adding a close-up lens, except with non-macro lenses already in your kit. It can be work well, but can be a challenge to find two lenses that work together well. Many years ago I happened to have a 28mm lens that reversed and worked quite well on a 135mm lens that was also in my kit. Those two lenses had the same filter thread size, making the reversing easy. This technique generally is best done with prime lenses, not with zooms.
It's also possible to get close-up shots simply by reverse mounting an existing lens on the camera. There are special mounting rings for this purpose. A problem with modern, electronically controlled lenses though, is that there will be no auto focus nor any way to control the lens aperture, unless some special wiring is also included. This makes the few reverse rings offered for use with modern lenses and cameras quite complex and expensive.
The easiest and often best way to do close-up and macro work is an actual macro lens. There are many of those both new and used. B&H PHoto lists 27 macro lenses to choose from (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/SLR-Camera-Lenses/ci/274/N/4288584247?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f%2Cfct_special-designs_3320%3Amacro), but the list quickly drops to just 7 as soon as you limit it to only those lenses with a built in focusing motor that will provide autofocus on your camera (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/SLR-Camera-Lenses/ci/274/N/4288584247?filters=fct_a_focus-type_5738%3Abuilt-in-af-motor-f-nikon%2Cfct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f%2Cfct_lenses-kits_7315%3Alenses-only%2Cfct_special-designs_3320%3Amacro). It's actually just 6 lenses, because one appears twice (choice of brand new or a somewhat less expensive refurbished).
Notice that the Tokina 100mm Macro lens IS NOT on the list of lenses that will be able to AF on a D5600. While the Tokina 100mm is popular for it's relatively low price ($429), the version of it for Nikon F-mount cameras doesn't have the built-in focusing motor. So it will be manual focus only on Nikon cameras other than the D7000-series, D500 or full frame models. This may not be a deal-breaker. Many people shooting macro prefer to use manual focus anyway. But it does limit using the lens for other purposes. If in spite of its limitations you consider this lens new and used, the current ATX-i version appears to only be a cosmetic update of the earlier AT-X version. They have identical optical and mechanical specifications, so might be expected to ultimately give the same performance and results.
I would encourage you to primarily consider lenses around the 90mm, 100mm and 105mm focal lengths. For most people these are the most versatile. When you are shooting at high magnification, the front of the lens will be quite close to your subject. Shorter focal lengths greatly reduce this "working distance", which can be a problem with live subjects and also risks casting a shadow over subjects when working with available light. Longer focal lengths increase working distance (and may be necessary with very shy subjects or dangerous ones), but also make it more difficult to get a steady shot, while rendering ultra shallow depth of field. Longer focal length macro lenses usually require using a tripod, where the 90 to 105mm range can often be hand held.
AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 40mm f/2.8G is one of the most affordable macro lenses currently available at under $300. It's quite compact, too. But it will put you extremely close to subjects. This might be fine for work shooting inanimate subjects in studio where you have a lot of control over lighting. But it will be difficult to use in the field and in ambient light conditions. Also note that this lens has no image stabilization (which, admittedly, is of limited help at high magnifications... it's most useful when hand-holding the lens for other, non-macro purposes).
AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR is close enough to 90mm that working distance should be good and this is one of the more attractively priced lenses at a bit over $550. Note that it's an f/3.5 lens... 2/3 stop slower than the f/2.8 offered by most macro lenses. This would be no problem with macro work, since it's usually necessary to stop down to f/8 or f/11 anyway, in search of a little depth of field. But it might be a limiting factor is planning to use the lens for other purposes, such as portraiture, where a large aperture lens can be very desirable. This lens does have VR image stabilization.
AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED is a possibility if you want a compact lens (which in this case also happens to be "FX" and capable of use on a full frame camera). I use a 60mm in my kit when I want to lighten my load and don't plan to do high magnification macro work. But it is NOT my most used macro lens (that's a 100mm). Costing almost $600, note that this Micro Nikkor doesn't have image stabilization. But it does have an f/2.8 maximum aperture.
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro is considered by many people to be comparable to, possibly even better in some ways than the far more expensive Micro Nikkor 105mm (see below). With high quality build, a full set of features (incl. image stabilization, 3-step focus limiter and more) and excellent image quality, at $619 this lens is a very good value. It's also been around for some years, so might be possible to find a nice copy of it used for a bit less money.
Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 VC USD (F017) is the latest and greatest version in a long line of 90mm Tamron SP lenses. They've been making versions since the 1980s... at first manual focus only, then several variants with autofocus and finally this latest that's got the best image quality of the bunch, as well as a full set of features. Note the "F017" model number that distinguishes this version from the earlier ones. Externally it also uses the latest Tamron styling with a modern all black barrel, very wide and finely ribbed focusing ring, and a silver ring at the base (the previous version looks less modern and has a gold band in approx. the middle of the lens). This lens sells new for $649. It was introduced only two or three years ago, so there will be limited number of them on the used market.
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED has a lot of fans, but also is by far the most expensive option today at almost $900 new. Refurbished are sometimes available for a couple hundred $ less, but still is among the most expensive options currently in production. Overall, the Micro Nikkor 105mm is close to legendary. Still, it's now the oldest design on this list and may be due for a refresh, which it's unlikely to ever get as Nikon moves toward their mirrorless system and away from DSLRs with the F-mount.
Although it doesn't compare all the above, you might find this comparison article interesting: https://petapixel.com/2020/04/15/macro-lens-test-canon-nikon-sony-laowa-sigma-and-tamron-compared/
The Canon and Sony lenses in that comparison are only helpful anecdotally, because they cannot be fitted to your camera at all. Also note the Laowa 100mm is a manual focus, manual aperture only lens, though it offers 2X magnification (double what's possible with the others). And the Tamron 90mm shown in the comparison is an older version, preceding the F017 which offers improved image quality.
Personally I use Canon gear, so have different lens options than you. Even so, the same general principles apply. A 100mm is by far my most used macro lens on both full frame and APS-C cameras like yours. It's simply the most versatile focal. Yes, I have a 60mm that I'll sometimes opt for instead, as it's lighter and more compact. Mine is crop-only and has an f/2.0 aperture, which makes it a little more dual-purpose than most macro lenses. I also use a manual focus 45mm lens for close-up work... but that's in-studio (small product) photography. In addition, I have a 65mm and 180mm macro lenses. I consider both of those specialized, especially the ultra-high magnification 65mm. It can do no less than 1X and up to 5X magnification and is most often on a tripod. The 180mm I only get out when I need a lot of working space and I mostly use it on a tripod or at least a monopod (though I tend to use those fairly often with other macro and close-up lenses, too). I even have a vintage 1980s Tamron 90mm SP macro lens... which I've adapted for use in my small mirrorless camera kit. Finally, I also use macro extension tubes (a Kenko set, plus several Canon OEM) and have one auxiliary close-up lens (Canon 500D in 77mm size) for use with one particular zoom.
EDIT: Someone mentioned flash, which can be important shooting macro. I have two types of dedicated macro flash, but very often don't have those with me so I adapt a standard flash for the purpose. That's cheap, easy and works surprisingly well. My most-used macro flash is a twin light... dual flashes on brackets that allow each to be positioned many different ways. I also have a ring light, but don't care for it with most macro photography. At less than 1X, or maybe even 2X, it just gives way too flat and "clinical looking" lighting for my tastes. I pretty much only use the ring lite on my 65mm lens at more extreme magnifications... 2X and more. It works well for that.
Thomas902 is right, you may not need one. It depends upon what lenses you already have and how much magnification you actually need for whatever you want to shoot, whether macro extension rings or an auxiliary close-up lens might do the job just as well. Generally speaking, the macro rings offer the most versatility with existing lenses. The are usually best used with a short telephoto lens (say 50mm to 100mm on a D5600). I recommend the Kenko set as a very good quality, reasonably priced option at about $135. There are also other brands with similar capabilities for a bit less money. These fully support auto focus on your camera, as well as aperture control. (I do not recommend the Nikon branded macro extensions... they're high quality, but pricey and they don't fully support AF. Not to pick on Nikon... Canon's are also over priced, though they do support full functionality of the lens. In fact, most OEM tubes are over-priced... a single one can cost you as much as the full set of three from Kenko.)
A "close-up" lens attaches to the front of an existing lens to make it able to focus closer. There are cheap ones that aren't worth a damn.... and there are better quality that can be useful. Since they screw into the filter threads of the lens, so are only usable on a select lenses... not as universally usable as the macro extension tubes that fit between the lens and the camera to make the lens able to focus closer. Close-up lenses also can have some effect on image quality... additional optics always take away a little or a lot (depending upon the quality of the optics). The extension tubes use no optics at all, so have little effect. Also, close-up lenses are like adding a magnifying glass and make the lens they're mated to able to focus within a certain range. To have more versatility means having to buy several close-up filters in different strengths (just avoid the cheap sets, which are awful).
High quality "diopter" close-up lenses which use multiple elements can be pretty good.... but are pricey. Depending upon size (diameter), a single high quality close-up lens in a large size can cost as much as the Kenko set of tubes. Close-up lenses also are getting harder to find. Canon used to make a wide selection of sizes in two different strengths (so called "500D" and "250D"), but appears to have discontinued many of the sizes and now only offers a few.
There are other ways to achieve high magnification shots with your existing gear. One is called "reverse stacking". To do this a special mounting ring is used to attach one lens backward in front of another lens mounted on the camera. This is much like adding a close-up lens, except with non-macro lenses already in your kit. It can be work well, but can be a challenge to find two lenses that work together well. Many years ago I happened to have a 28mm lens that reversed and worked quite well on a 135mm lens that was also in my kit. Those two lenses had the same filter thread size, making the reversing easy. This technique generally is best done with prime lenses, not with zooms.
It's also possible to get close-up shots simply by reverse mounting an existing lens on the camera. There are special mounting rings for this purpose. A problem with modern, electronically controlled lenses though, is that there will be no auto focus nor any way to control the lens aperture, unless some special wiring is also included. This makes the few reverse rings offered for use with modern lenses and cameras quite complex and expensive.
The easiest and often best way to do close-up and macro work is an actual macro lens. There are many of those both new and used. B&H PHoto lists 27 macro lenses to choose from (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/SLR-Camera-Lenses/ci/274/N/4288584247?filters=fct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f%2Cfct_special-designs_3320%3Amacro), but the list quickly drops to just 7 as soon as you limit it to only those lenses with a built in focusing motor that will provide autofocus on your camera (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/SLR-Camera-Lenses/ci/274/N/4288584247?filters=fct_a_focus-type_5738%3Abuilt-in-af-motor-f-nikon%2Cfct_lens-mount_3442%3Anikon-f%2Cfct_lenses-kits_7315%3Alenses-only%2Cfct_special-designs_3320%3Amacro). It's actually just 6 lenses, because one appears twice (choice of brand new or a somewhat less expensive refurbished).
Notice that the Tokina 100mm Macro lens IS NOT on the list of lenses that will be able to AF on a D5600. While the Tokina 100mm is popular for it's relatively low price ($429), the version of it for Nikon F-mount cameras doesn't have the built-in focusing motor. So it will be manual focus only on Nikon cameras other than the D7000-series, D500 or full frame models. This may not be a deal-breaker. Many people shooting macro prefer to use manual focus anyway. But it does limit using the lens for other purposes. If in spite of its limitations you consider this lens new and used, the current ATX-i version appears to only be a cosmetic update of the earlier AT-X version. They have identical optical and mechanical specifications, so might be expected to ultimately give the same performance and results.
I would encourage you to primarily consider lenses around the 90mm, 100mm and 105mm focal lengths. For most people these are the most versatile. When you are shooting at high magnification, the front of the lens will be quite close to your subject. Shorter focal lengths greatly reduce this "working distance", which can be a problem with live subjects and also risks casting a shadow over subjects when working with available light. Longer focal lengths increase working distance (and may be necessary with very shy subjects or dangerous ones), but also make it more difficult to get a steady shot, while rendering ultra shallow depth of field. Longer focal length macro lenses usually require using a tripod, where the 90 to 105mm range can often be hand held.
AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 40mm f/2.8G is one of the most affordable macro lenses currently available at under $300. It's quite compact, too. But it will put you extremely close to subjects. This might be fine for work shooting inanimate subjects in studio where you have a lot of control over lighting. But it will be difficult to use in the field and in ambient light conditions. Also note that this lens has no image stabilization (which, admittedly, is of limited help at high magnifications... it's most useful when hand-holding the lens for other, non-macro purposes).
AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR is close enough to 90mm that working distance should be good and this is one of the more attractively priced lenses at a bit over $550. Note that it's an f/3.5 lens... 2/3 stop slower than the f/2.8 offered by most macro lenses. This would be no problem with macro work, since it's usually necessary to stop down to f/8 or f/11 anyway, in search of a little depth of field. But it might be a limiting factor is planning to use the lens for other purposes, such as portraiture, where a large aperture lens can be very desirable. This lens does have VR image stabilization.
AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED is a possibility if you want a compact lens (which in this case also happens to be "FX" and capable of use on a full frame camera). I use a 60mm in my kit when I want to lighten my load and don't plan to do high magnification macro work. But it is NOT my most used macro lens (that's a 100mm). Costing almost $600, note that this Micro Nikkor doesn't have image stabilization. But it does have an f/2.8 maximum aperture.
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro is considered by many people to be comparable to, possibly even better in some ways than the far more expensive Micro Nikkor 105mm (see below). With high quality build, a full set of features (incl. image stabilization, 3-step focus limiter and more) and excellent image quality, at $619 this lens is a very good value. It's also been around for some years, so might be possible to find a nice copy of it used for a bit less money.
Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 VC USD (F017) is the latest and greatest version in a long line of 90mm Tamron SP lenses. They've been making versions since the 1980s... at first manual focus only, then several variants with autofocus and finally this latest that's got the best image quality of the bunch, as well as a full set of features. Note the "F017" model number that distinguishes this version from the earlier ones. Externally it also uses the latest Tamron styling with a modern all black barrel, very wide and finely ribbed focusing ring, and a silver ring at the base (the previous version looks less modern and has a gold band in approx. the middle of the lens). This lens sells new for $649. It was introduced only two or three years ago, so there will be limited number of them on the used market.
AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED has a lot of fans, but also is by far the most expensive option today at almost $900 new. Refurbished are sometimes available for a couple hundred $ less, but still is among the most expensive options currently in production. Overall, the Micro Nikkor 105mm is close to legendary. Still, it's now the oldest design on this list and may be due for a refresh, which it's unlikely to ever get as Nikon moves toward their mirrorless system and away from DSLRs with the F-mount.
Although it doesn't compare all the above, you might find this comparison article interesting: https://petapixel.com/2020/04/15/macro-lens-test-canon-nikon-sony-laowa-sigma-and-tamron-compared/
The Canon and Sony lenses in that comparison are only helpful anecdotally, because they cannot be fitted to your camera at all. Also note the Laowa 100mm is a manual focus, manual aperture only lens, though it offers 2X magnification (double what's possible with the others). And the Tamron 90mm shown in the comparison is an older version, preceding the F017 which offers improved image quality.
Personally I use Canon gear, so have different lens options than you. Even so, the same general principles apply. A 100mm is by far my most used macro lens on both full frame and APS-C cameras like yours. It's simply the most versatile focal. Yes, I have a 60mm that I'll sometimes opt for instead, as it's lighter and more compact. Mine is crop-only and has an f/2.0 aperture, which makes it a little more dual-purpose than most macro lenses. I also use a manual focus 45mm lens for close-up work... but that's in-studio (small product) photography. In addition, I have a 65mm and 180mm macro lenses. I consider both of those specialized, especially the ultra-high magnification 65mm. It can do no less than 1X and up to 5X magnification and is most often on a tripod. The 180mm I only get out when I need a lot of working space and I mostly use it on a tripod or at least a monopod (though I tend to use those fairly often with other macro and close-up lenses, too). I even have a vintage 1980s Tamron 90mm SP macro lens... which I've adapted for use in my small mirrorless camera kit. Finally, I also use macro extension tubes (a Kenko set, plus several Canon OEM) and have one auxiliary close-up lens (Canon 500D in 77mm size) for use with one particular zoom.
EDIT: Someone mentioned flash, which can be important shooting macro. I have two types of dedicated macro flash, but very often don't have those with me so I adapt a standard flash for the purpose. That's cheap, easy and works surprisingly well. My most-used macro flash is a twin light... dual flashes on brackets that allow each to be positioned many different ways. I also have a ring light, but don't care for it with most macro photography. At less than 1X, or maybe even 2X, it just gives way too flat and "clinical looking" lighting for my tastes. I pretty much only use the ring lite on my 65mm lens at more extreme magnifications... 2X and more. It works well for that.
Sep 24, 2021 13:56:16 #
Sep 24, 2021 14:22:35 #
Real Nikon Lover wrote:
I agree Bill. The bang for the buck I have got out of that little 60 is incredible. I keep a 50mm in my bag but ready to change it out to the 60 it is just THAT good.
I believe I bought my 60 @ B&H used. It was like new in the box with all the gingerbread.
I believe I bought my 60 @ B&H used. It was like new in the box with all the gingerbread.
Dazzling and eye-catching 💜💜💜💜💜
Sep 24, 2021 15:06:40 #
billnikon wrote:
A good lens would be the older Nikon 60mm 2.8 D lens. You can get a good deal on a slightly used one off ebay.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1311&_nkw=nikon+60mm+2.8d&_sacat=0
It is extremely sharp and will last forever.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1311&_nkw=nikon+60mm+2.8d&_sacat=0
It is extremely sharp and will last forever.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
Beautiful shot of a noteworthy creature
💚💚💚💚💚
Sep 24, 2021 18:15:47 #
Sep 24, 2021 19:18:12 #
DaveyDitzer
Loc: Western PA
Thomas902 wrote:
Sltolivar since you're using a Nikon D5600 which h... (show quote)
I have and use the 40mm DX macro lens on my D5600 and love it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.