Help with macro lens(s) (Page 4): Several things I think you might consider 1 - close focus distance - how close t=do you want to get to the object? Yes, extension tubes are available...

BillMunder Loc: New Hyde Park. NY

[quote=BboH]Several things I think you might consider
1 - close focus distance - how close t=do you want to get to the object? Yes, extension tubes are available - but in the field they may not be convenient
2 - how far away from the object to

Hello.
How is it not convenient to work with extension tubes in the field ?

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

[quote=BillMunder]

BboH wrote:

Several things I think you might consider
1 - close focus distance - how close t=do you want to get to the object? Yes, extension tubes are available - but in the field they may not be convenient
2 - how far away from the object to

Hello.
How is it not convenient to work with extension tubes in the field ?

I work with extension tubes in the field all the time-- so yes it can be done. Tinusbum (macro forum) uses a full set @ 68mm all the time.

Several set-ups are posted here: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-32754-1.html

morrisb Loc: adelaide south australia

Benttree wrote:

Kurtb,
Macro, Tamron make 1-1 90mm Macro for Nikon,
and is under $400.
50mm is far to short on inces,t butterflies,dragons, etc.

excuse me, no incest on this forum please

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

jeryh wrote:

Don'ty bother with either of those- they are too short!

Please use the Quote Reply tab, so we know to whom you comment is directed.

rcurrie Loc: Kingsport, TN

I have a Nikon DX 85mm. It is an execellent lens that I have greatly enjoyed.

georgevedwards Loc: Essex, Maryland.

Your inquiry got me interested, I have been wanting to go macro for a while, I like the part about being far enough away so as to not to make the little critters run off. A refurbished Nikon 105mm would be one I would seriously consider and from a reputable source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801011509-USE/nikon_1988_telephoto_af_micro_nikkor.html

kurtb wrote:

I currently have a Nikon 3100 and am looking to enter the world of macro photography. I am on a limited budget and have been looking at the Nikon 40mm and 60mm lenses. I also understand that Tamron has a good 60 mm lens. I am trying to stay under $400 and would appreciate advise on the pros and cons of these 2 lenses (Nikon vs. Tamron and 40mm vs. 60mm). Thanks!

amehta Loc: Boston

georgevedwards wrote:

Your inquiry got me interested, I have been wanting to go macro for a while, I like the part about being far enough away so as to not to make the little critters run off. A refurbished Nikon 105mm would be one I would seriously consider and from a reputable source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801011509-USE/nikon_1988_telephoto_af_micro_nikkor.html

That one is used, not refurbished. But yes, that is an excellent lens. I used it for quite a while, until I switched to the 200mm and sold the 105mm to my dad, who likes that it is lighter than the 200mm. KEH also has it available used.

georgevedwards Loc: Essex, Maryland.

I would prefer the 200mm also but it seems to be a lot more expensive.

amehta wrote:

That one is used, not refurbished. But yes, that is an excellent lens. I used it for quite a while, until I switched to the 200mm and sold the 105mm to my dad, who likes that it is lighter than the 200mm. KEH also has it available used.

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

kurtb wrote:

I currently have a Nikon 3100 and am looking to enter the world of macro photography. I am on a limited budget and have been looking at the Nikon 40mm and 60mm lenses. I also understand that Tamron has a good 60 mm lens. I am trying to stay under $400 and would appreciate advise on the pros and cons of these 2 lenses (Nikon vs. Tamron and 40mm vs. 60mm). Thanks!

I knew how this was going to end when you said looking at a 40or60 mm macro . don't or you will be kicking yourself . I have read the same thing hundereds of times , I might as well have thrown the money in the fire . get a longer one 105mm even if you have to wait and save up for it . keep your eye
open on the used market . at the very least get the 90 mm

amehta Loc: Boston

georgevedwards wrote:

I would prefer the 200mm also but it seems to be a lot more expensive.

Even though I switched, the 105mm is so good that my dad wanted it since I didn't use it any more.

JohninRockville Loc: Rockville, Indiana

Not sure why you're looking for a macro but for close up shots I find my zoom lens produces as good shots as my 100 mm macro and you can be further from the subject, which is certainly a plus. My favorite lens is 28 - 200 and besides excellent close ups has produced great landscape, panorama and portrait shots. Add extension tubes and you can get right down on top of a subject. Granted - it's Canon but there must be similar available for Nikon.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

JohninRockville wrote:

. . . my zoom lens produces as good shots as my 100 mm macro and you can be further from the subject, which is certainly a plus.

A true macro lens has a flat Field-of-View (true plain), and can reproduce 1:1 magnification (life-size). All standard prime lenses, and all zoom lenses have a curved FoV (hemispherical) and can usually get no closer than 1:2 mag (life-size). Both characteristics are critical for acceptable true macro-photography.

Benttree Loc: GA.

Nikonian 72, I just did view your macros, you sure have been busy. Many so interesting good images .
Thank you from sharing.