Largobob wrote:
I don't believe this lens has "VR"....and can't find any information on it's focusing motor.
No it doesn't have VR, it's an older lens which hasn't been updated to include it. Bear in mind also that VR does mean extra glass in the lens, which will alter the characteristics of a lens. There is no info on its focussing motor because it doesn't have one. It's screw drive, meaning your camera must have a motor to use af. These additions would increase the price meaning it wouldn't be as great a value. Currently I find mine an excellent value, it's also a great portrait lens. Autofocus is decent, and once it's locked it actually tracks reasonably well.
parishard wrote:
There is in England and in a lot of the other English speaking areas of the world. There in no e in American-English.
I googled it. From my search, it is actually wrong to have an e on the end of it, no matter what. So in England at least we can say it's wrong. We are discussing the spelling of "lens" right, you didn't quote anyone?
DavidPhares wrote:
Thete is no e on the end if the word lens.
Amazing how many super sleuths noticed the 't' in 'there', but not the 'i' in 'of'...
Sorry for the off topic post, just couldn't help myself!!!
I recently purchased a used Nikon 105 2.8D for use on my D750. I use it primarily for macro, where I usually use a tripod so why VR? I also don't mind the aperture ring on the D......less than 1/2 the price is nothing to sneeze at either.
I use a Nikon 85mm 1.8 for portrait work but have heard the 105 would also be a good fit.
Good luck!
DavidPhares wrote:
Thete is no e on the end if the word lens.
There is not spelled Thete.
It depends on what you want to photograph. If you want to photograph insects, I recommend a 150mm or 180mm. With the shorter ones you will not be able to get close enough for life-sized images without scaring the insects to flight. Nikon's 200mm is also quite good.
It depends on what you want to use it for. For studio reproduction work one would use a shorter lens (short working distance) predominantly corrected for flat field (very low curvature of field). For general macro work (outdoors, ...) most suitable is a focal length around 100mm. Longer lenses (longer working distances) are mostly used for special applications.
Optically there is no big differences between the macro lenses from major manufacturers. VR (or whatever the vibration stabilization is called) is not a factor - macro is usually done from a stable tripod.
Different strokes for different folks. I have done quite a bit of macro in the past and rarely used a tripod. If you are trying to photograph an insect or spider, there is usually no opportunity to use a tripod. By the time you get the tripod in position for a macro shot (if it can even be done), you have probably frightened the subject off.
I use a Lester A. Dine 105 f-2.8 macro which is 1:1 and I also use a Loawa 60mm f-2.8 which is a 2:1 macro. I also use extension tubes to help shorten the focal distance at times. Anything greater than 1:1 ratio to the camera's sensor area and the size of the subject on it is referred to as a "Super Macro". Canon makes a highly specialized 60mm that has an adjustable range from 1:1 to 5:1. When using a macro lens you will most often be using manual focus for the focal plane is razor sharp even at stopped down settings of f-11 through f-22 or and higher.
From my experience of using macro lens, the longer the mm the further you can be from your subject which is very practical outside of a controlled studio of some type. My dream lens would be a 200mm macro which would allow macro photos of insects from a distance that would not drive them away or have them crawl on your lens.
Soul Dr.
Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley
I second that, I really like what my 60mm can do.
I shoot most all my macro shots handheld with AF.
Here are a couple of examples of what this lens can do.
Before you louse things up, Thimnk (Purposely misspelled)
PeterBergh wrote:
Actually, there's one T in THERE (but not two!)
I like my Tamron SP60, although I see merit in the SP90 for more working distance. I get great results using the SP60 as a portrait lens as well.
Personally, I like the Nikon 40mm DX lens. As usual, it depnds on what you want to do with the lens.
Love all the comments, and I am looking for a Nikon macro lens. Any recommendations on this lens (Nikon 105mm f2.8 G ED-IF AF-S ) the D lens or the DX one? I have the Nikon D200 and mainly want close ups of flowers, some insects, jewelry. I am still pretty new at all this and there is something special about macro photography, so any help is appreciated. Thx
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.