Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

Oh, the AF 200mm f/4D micro IF ED is totally in a class of it's own.
Likely one of the most useful optics I've ever owned. It's build quality is up there with the finest.
Did I mention it's a superb portrait lens?

Illustrated: Nikon F3 (35mm SLR) with an AI-S 50mm 1.4 Nikkor Lens
Professional Model and Commercial Photographer: Rebecca Lawrence (NYC)
Photography; Wardrobe Styling & Make-up: yours truly

Camera: Nikon D3; Lens: AF 200mm Micro Nikkor f/4D IF-ED; Illumination BD with Sock

(Download)

dsnoke Loc: North Georgia, USA

I use the Nikkor (Nikon's brand of lenses) 85 mm micro (Nikon's term for macro) lens on my D7500. That's the full-frame equivalent of about 130 mm or thereabouts. My working distance is a foot or so in most cases, but I can get to about 9 inches if I want. I found that lens to be smaller, lighter and easier to use than the Tokina or Tamron or Nikkor lenses in the 90-105 mm range. The big difference is that my lens only opens to f/3.5 rather than f/2.8. I do not find that to be a problem I can't handle. And I'm a miser. My lens costs less than the other options.

DeanS Loc: Capital City area of North Carolina

I second this rc.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Thanks, Thomas!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Same answer as given to the other Nikon shooter looking for a macro lens who posted a few minutes before you...

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-758177-2.html#13572205

The only difference, you're using a DX camera. But my lens recommendations are the same.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

I thought you might find this link of interest. I posted it up regarding the Nikkor 55. The lens combo is unique IMHO.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-706209-1.html

Stats153

Agreed -- I have the Tokina 100 and Nikon 40, and much prefer the Tokina

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Choosing a true macro lens is really no different from choosing any lens. It depends upon what you want to photograph. I never "met" a macro lens that wasn't good for something. I'm sure there are some mediocre ones, but I don't know who makes them. The ones I've used are very good to outstanding.

Full Frame:

55-60mm is for copy stand use, copying slides, photographing things you want to or can remain close to while working. It offers slightly more depth of field than longer lenses

100-105mm is usually awful for copy stand use, but it is a good general purpose macro focal length for nature work. It's a good portrait lens, too!

150-200mm is best for poisonous snakes, bees, wasps, hornets, spiders, unfriendly critters...


APS-C:

40mm is for copy stand use, copying slides, photographing things you want to or can remain close to while working. It offers slightly more depth of field than longer lenses.

55-60mm is marginal for copy stand use, but a good general purpose macro focal length for nature work. Also a good portrait lens...

100-105mm is awful for copy stand use, but a good general purpose macro focal length for nature work. On APS-C, it's marginally suitable for nasty, stinging or biting critters.

150-200mm is best for poisonous snakes, bees, wasps, hornets, spiders, unfriendly critters...


Micro 4/3 Platform:

30mm is for copy stand use, copying slides, photographing things you want to or can remain close to while working. It offers slightly more depth of field than longer lenses. It is a good waist-up to full-length portrait lens

45mm is marginal for copy stand use. It is a great portrait lens, and a decent general purpose macro focal length.

60mm is awful for copy stand use, but a good general purpose macro focal length for nature work. It's suitable for nasty, stinging or biting critters.

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

Beautifully done, Thomas!

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

I agree...Fact is, if I didn't need VR due to advancing age, I'd still have one...and...on an APSC camera, 150mm equivalent view gives a comfortable working distance.

paulrnzpn Loc: New Zealand

I use Canon gear and I have a Canon 100mm L F/1:2.8 Macro lens. It's my favourite lens.

I tried out someone else's macro extension tubes on my 18-55mm kit lens (Canon 600D body, APSC sensor) one time and they seemed to work fine. However, some light is lost with extensions tubes, as I understand it, so you may need to increase ISO to compensate.

I also know a few people who have Tamron 90mm macro lens (on Canons and on Nikons) and they are very happy with those. Someone else I know has a 60mm macro lens (on Olympus camera, 3/4 APSC sensor) but the problem with 60mm is you need to be closer to the subject (that may scare living creatures), and also, camera shadows can be a problem sometimes because you need to be a lot closer to your subject for the same closeness as compared to a 90mm or 100mm lens.

flyboy61 Loc: The Great American Desert

One Caveat... when working with my Tokina 100 mm, I was close, and the Wasps were disturbed when I used flash. I stopped and remained unstung.


Squadron! Intruder Alert!

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

I am amazed at how you got them to pose equidistantly - a testament to your skill in wrangling these little, benign creatures 🙃🙃🙃🙃🙃 Really a great capture 💰💰💰💰💰

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

We were in Spain in October. At a visit to a winery for lunch, one of those little bastards stung me on my right pinky finger while I was just sitting at a table, listening to our tour guide talking about the ancient history of the place. It hurt for days.