Bozsik wrote:
Get the Nikkor 105mm micro. The most recent version. It is very affordable and you will be set.
Yes, it needs to be the "AF-S" version. The Micro Nikkor 105mm is a superb lens, but at almost $900 I wouldn't call it "very affordable". In fact, that makes it one of the most expensive macro lenses around the 100mm focal length.
The only macro that's more expensive in Nikon F-mount is the Zeiss Milvus 100mm... upwards of $1500 if memory serves. It's a manual focus-only lens (so wouldn't work for that auto stacking), but with an f/2 max aperture the Zeiss is at least a stop faster than all but one or two other macro lenses.
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM macro has in-lens motor too (ultrasonic, similar to AF-S).... is on sale right now for $519. That's a hefty discount of $450 off list price, perhaps Sigma has a new version coming soon and is clearing the shelves in advance. But there's nothing wrong with the current model. This is an internal focusing (IF) lens with image stabilization (OS).
There are also two 90mm Tamron SP macro lenses, both of which have in-lens motors. The $500 model uses a micro motor that's a bit slower focusing and noisier, and it is not an internal focusing lens (increases length when focused closer). The $650 model uses a somewhat faster and quieter ultrasonic "USD" focus drive that's similar to AF-S and has image stabilization. The more expensive Tamron is an IF lens.
Something interesting.... DXO Mark gives the Nikkor AF-S 105mm Micro a higher overall score... Yet if you look at the various metrics they measure, the Sigma is rated to be slightly sharper, have equal light transmission, less distortion, less vignetting and less chromatic aberration.... Very minor differences between them, but somehow DXO adds that up to a higher rating for the Nikkor?
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/AF-S-Nikkor-VR-105mm-f-2.8G-ED-on-Nikon-D800-versus-105mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D800__261_792_361_792There's a pretty thorough review of the Sigma lens here, including some illustrated comparisons with the Micro Nikkor, both on D850, here:
https://www.closeuphotography.com/sigma-105mm-os-macro-lens/2017/10/20/sigma-105mm-f28-ex-dg-os-hsm-macro-lensThere isn't a full review of the Nikkor 105mm (Bryan's focus is on the Canon system, primarily), but there are magnified test shots done with it (on 24MP Nikon D3x) which can be compared side-by-side against the Sigma 105mm (on 21MP Canon 1Ds Mark III), here:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=645&Camera=614&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=790&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0There is a full review of the Sigma 105mm at that website:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-105mm-f-2.8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-Macro-Lens-Review.aspx Something nice on the Sigma 105mm is it's Focus Limiter.... It's a more advanced, three range limiter: full, non-macro range (.45m to infinity) and macro-only range (.31m to .45m). The Sigma arrangement makes a lot more sense to me. The more expensive Tamron 90mm has a three range limiter with full, non-macro and macro-only ranges, similar to the Sigma.
The Micro Nikkor 105mm uses a simpler two range limiter: full range and non-macro range (.5m to infinity). The less expensive Tamron 90mm uses a similar two range limiter, too: full and non-macro.
Another thing that Sigma does is includes two lens hoods with their 105mm... one is designed for use on full frame and a deeper one is for use on APS-C cameras. The Nikkor 105's hood is larger and deeper, a "tulip" design usable with both FX and DX cameras.
I don't like that none of these lenses have option of using them with a tripod mounting collar (the two Canon 100mm macros do). To me that's a useful feature, although aside from the Canon lenses, it's mostly only found on 150mm, 180mm and 200mm macro lenses.