macro lens (Page 2): Many UHH members have already recommended the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 micro which is an excellent lens. To save cost the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 DX micro is also great. It's...

CO

Many UHH members have already recommended the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 micro which is an excellent lens. To save cost the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 DX micro is also great. It's strictly for DX sensor Nikons so it's a little smaller and lighter than the 105mm. It also has VRII for hand-held shooting.

Bob Boner

If you are interested in insects, I highly recommend something in the 150-200mm range. You will not scare so many before getting the shot. I currently have 3 macro lenses and over the years have had everything from 50mm to 200. Long is better.

candle57 Loc: nova scotia, canada

Well, I signed off because I was going to bed. Hope that was okay. Had every intention of going back on to check on responses.

candle57 Loc: nova scotia, canada

Thank you everyone for all your replies, very helpful indeed.

Have a good day - I am signing off now because I have to go to work.

Runcible

Kmgw9v wrote:

Nikon 105mm 2.8G

That's the one!

Tony.mustang

Hi. , nikon 105macro are great. I know the prices are high , but look on e bay you can alway's find a deal. Try before you buy.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Nikonian72 wrote:

P.S. to the Original Poster:
I recommend following macro advice ONLY from UHH members who actually post macro-photography, either on UHH or their own websites. My links are lower left this post.

I have never posted macro shots in this forum and instead I have been doing macro photography for many years.
My personal macro lens is the old 105mm f4 Micro Nikkor from the late 70's or early 80's.
just saying.

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

candle 57 wrote:

I have a NikonD3100 and wanting to purchase a macro lens. I like taking close-ups of insects, flowers, anything small actually.

Any suggestions what type of lens would be good and not on the very expensive side, I hope.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Nikon makes an 80mm micro, available on ebay in mint condition around 350.00

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

The closer you get to life size, the less effective VR is. Nikon even notates that in their literature. Some people shoot at 1/2 life size with VR & crop the resultant image & that works OK. Many macro shooters (most of the ones on UHH's "True macro" section, use additional lighting. A flash will serve dual purposes. It will allow one to stop down their lens for increased Depth Of Field (minimal with macro distances as it is) & the short duration of the flash will stop any motion, be it yours (as VR would help with) or your subjects (which VR won't help with ). One does have to be careful of the ambient light falling on a subject as too low a shutter speed may allow for a secondary image besides the one captured by the flash. Unless they intend to use the lens for other than macro shooting, there are plenty of more capable lenses for those purposes, as being limited to a single focal length can be a PITA at times. I have 9 different "True" macro lenses from 55 to 180mm in focal length. Some as auto focus, most are manual focus. I prefer to shoot entirely in manual for my macro shooting, thus my go to macro lens is an older 105mm F2.8 manual focus macro.... hat said, most any true macro lens will deliver good results as long as proper technique is applied. If cost is a concern, consider B&H or KEH for used macro lenses to save some money.

CO wrote:

Many UHH members have already recommended the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 micro which is an excellent lens. To save cost the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 DX micro is also great. It's strictly for DX sensor Nikons so it's a little smaller and lighter than the 105mm. It also has VRII for hand-held shooting.

houdel Loc: Chase, Michigan USA

oldtigger wrote:

Why do people ask questions and then sign off?

Because not everybody can sit and wait around all day staring at a computer screen to see if anyone replied to their post?

Oldtigger - you there? Tigger?? Tig???

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

candle57 wrote:

Thank you everyone for all your replies, very helpful indeed.

Have a good day - I am signing off now because I have to go to work.

I don't think you have to say "signing off", you can sign off any time you want and no body should tell you that you need to stay on line! You can't stay on the computer all day and do nothing else!
As your question I will suggest that you may start with a set of extension tube to experience the macro photo shoot. It's the cheapest way to start with!

granbob Loc: SW Wisc; E Iowa; W Illinois

Good Morning,
In addition to the advice offered by f8lee and others, you may want to also consider a Nikon lens no longer in production but very highly regarded in its day and still available on ebay and other sources. It a 200mmf4 that is manual focus but has provided me with a lot of enjoyment over the years. Its used price is frequently in the $200 to $300 range.
Good shooting with whatever you get

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

The problem with tubes is that you are locked into a fixed magnification ratio. A true macro lens is capable of variable ratios simply by turning the focus ring. Say, for instance, you have the set of tubes on to capture a tiny insect & along comes a Monarch butterfly. In order to capture the entire butterfly using tubes, you would have to remove tubes to find the right tube or combination thereof to capture the subject in it's entirety. With a dedicated macro lens, it's simply a matter of turning the focus ring until the subject is the size you want it to be. Don't get me wrong, tubes have their place and many use them when getting started, but they are limiting. I have both manual & auto tubes (as well as reversing rings, single & dual diopter close up filters, bellows units, etc) and they seldom get used. Actually, tubes are best used with macro lenses in order to increase the magnification.

wingclui44 wrote:

I don't think you have to say "signing off", you can sign off any time you want and no body should tell you that you need to stay on line! You can't stay on the computer all day and do nothing else!
As your question I will suggest that you may start with a set of extension tube to experience the macro photo shoot. It's the cheapest way to start with!

studavis

You might look at the Tamron 180MM or any of the longer Macro lenses. The advantage of the longer sense is you can get away from the object and not spook it in the case of live creaturs.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

f8lee wrote:

Candle, there is an entire section here on UHH dedicated to macro shooting, so you might want to look there (and do a search since you're not the first to ask this question). But for the sake of speed, allow me to offer a few thoughts:

You say "not on the very expensive side", but of course we don't know what you mean by that exactly. That said, I'm guessing the near $1000 cost of the exemplary 105MM Micro Nikkor might just be something you consider "expensive". If not, go with that - it is a great lens.

However, perhaps before buying anything, an understanding of your options in macro shooting gear might help. Dedicated macro lenses are not the only way to go - and while their image quality is generally quite excellent, you pay for that. If you do opt to get a true macro lens, at least you need to understand the differences between the various focal lengths - Nikon alone makes them in 40, 60, 85, 105 and 200MM lengths. The chief difference among these (besides the cost) is that the longer the focal length, the greater your "working distance" - the space between the lens and the subject. If For flowers and stamps, etc., the shorter lengths might suffice since you won't be afraid to get close. But for insects and the like, longer lengths might be better as you don't have to get as close to fill the frame with the small parts you're trying to shoot.

If you'd like to dip your toe into macro shooting, though, before spending a bunch - one possibility is to rent a lens from borrowlenses.com or a similar outfit. Another option would be to get a "close-up lens", which looks like a clear filter that screws onto the front of your current lens but is curved so that it enables much closer focusing (at the cost of disallowing infinity focus). These can be had for costs in the tens of dollars - for instance, the various close-up filters with a 62MM diameter seem to run from $27-$75.

Another option is an extension tube - this is a light-tight hollow tube that fits between your lens and the camera body to achieve closer focusing (again, at the expense of losing infinity focus when you use it) - but for a beginner this approach might be too cumbersome - I'd humbly suggest the close-up filter to start with.

I hope that makes some sense...

Candle, there is an entire section here on UHH ded... (show quote)

Great answer. :thumbup:

Another option is to find a T-Mounted bellows to put on the camera, and a 50, 60, or 75mm enlarger lens to put on the front of the bellows.

I had an arrangement like that many years ago, which I used for slide duplication and very close macro photography. It got me from about 1/4 life size to 4X life size.