Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.
Macro Lens Options
Sep 6, 2018 08:32:34 #
Rather than buying yet another lens for macro, I have a Fujifilm Finepix S9200 camera with a "super-macro" setting. I have taken a photo of an insect on the exterior side of a pane of glass in my front door while the camera lens was touching the interior side of the pane of glass. One cannot get much closer than that!
Sep 6, 2018 08:50:27 #
It has been my practice to buy Nikon lenses for my Nikon cameras. That said the 105 f2.8 Micro Nikkor is one of the finest macro lenses in the market and it will never give you issues used with a Nikon body.
I have a Micro Nikkor from the 80's, the 105 f4 which is tack sharp. Its images are awesome and I do not use it as often as I should. A great lens.
If you do not want to buy new the 105 f2.8 Micro Nikkor sales at very attractive prices in the second hand market. If you ever want to sell it its resale value is high.
I have a Micro Nikkor from the 80's, the 105 f4 which is tack sharp. Its images are awesome and I do not use it as often as I should. A great lens.
If you do not want to buy new the 105 f2.8 Micro Nikkor sales at very attractive prices in the second hand market. If you ever want to sell it its resale value is high.
Sep 6, 2018 09:27:05 #
gvarner
Loc: Central Oregon Coast
kpmac wrote:
Have you considered the Tokina 100mm? Great lens. I use one with my D7200. You can see many of my macros here.
👍👍👍👍
Check out People Photography section of our forum.
Sep 6, 2018 09:39:08 #
I would not recommend the Nikon 60mm, though a sharp and great lens it is bad for small insect photography as you will have to get close and that scares away insects such as butterflies, bees and other small insects. My recommendation would be at minimum the Nikon or Sigma 105mm which will give you some working distance and this lens also makes a great portrait lens. I also have the Sigma 150mm macro, Sigma 180mm macro and Tamron 180mm macro which are larger and heavier lenses that give a better working distance from the subject. I would also recommend (if you are doing macro) a front flash for your lens as when doing macro your depth of field is shallow and you usually need to shoot at f16 or higher to have a greater depth of field.
frjeff wrote:
Shoot a Nikon D7200. br br Would like to add a de... (show quote)
Sep 6, 2018 09:42:44 #
Brenda is absolutely correct in her assessment. I have a Nikon 200mm f4 macro and it weighs 41.8 oz. (1185 g) so it is quite heavy and it has a tendency to pull the front of the camera downward due to being 'front heavy'.
Also keep in mind that the minimum focal distances listed in the lens specs are measured from the camera's sensor and not the lens mount. CO offered a great suggestion for a DX format camera also and it should also be less expensive in comparison. If a full-frame camera is in your future then you may want to consider a FX lens. Regardless of your choice, the 105mm is a lens choice of many and they produce great images.
I have found that lighting is a very important facet of macro photography and it has a big impact on the final result so my advice is to plan ahead on what macro lighting system you will use in your decision of lens choice.
Enjoy your endeavor and hopefully it will change your life as it has mine.
Also keep in mind that the minimum focal distances listed in the lens specs are measured from the camera's sensor and not the lens mount. CO offered a great suggestion for a DX format camera also and it should also be less expensive in comparison. If a full-frame camera is in your future then you may want to consider a FX lens. Regardless of your choice, the 105mm is a lens choice of many and they produce great images.
I have found that lighting is a very important facet of macro photography and it has a big impact on the final result so my advice is to plan ahead on what macro lighting system you will use in your decision of lens choice.
Enjoy your endeavor and hopefully it will change your life as it has mine.
Sep 6, 2018 17:03:33 #
frjeff
Loc: Mid-Michigan
kpmac wrote:
Have you considered the Tokina 100mm? Great lens. I use one with my D7200. You can see many of my macros here.
Kpmac - can you please share with me how I pull up some of those macro Tokina pics?
Sep 6, 2018 17:06:59 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Here is my response to nearly the same question a few days ago (the search function on UHH is your friend 
)
...For your first/only macro lens I'd recommend focal lengths in the 90, 100, 105mm range on a full frame camera (crop cameras can use 60mm and 70mm, too). This is just a good compromise for general purpose, "walk around" macro shooting. Shorter and longer focal length macro are available, but tend to be a bit more specialized or limiting in their uses.
Any shorter and you'll be very close to many small subjects. (But this can be good for indoor "tabletop studio" work, with controlled lighting.)
Any longer gets a lot harder to hold steady without a tripod. Depth of field is very shallow and you end up stopping down more, using slower shutter speeds to compensate... compounding the problem. (But long focal lengths can be necessary for especially shy subjects.... or critters that bite or sting and/or are venemous!)
You really don't need to worry much about image quality.... pretty much all the macros available are capable of making very high quality images. It's their focal lengths, prices and other features that set them apart from each other.
The Sigma 105mm is very attractive at it's current sale price (about $570). That's a huge $400 discount off what it was selling for not long ago (when it was one of the highest priced). I suspect Sigma is clearing the shelves for a new model coming soon. But the current model is very good and is one of the most full featured available, with: internal focusing (doesn't increase in length when focused closer), OS image stabilization (two modes), Sigma's faster HSM ultrasonic focus drive, and a three stage focus limiter.
Tamron actually makes two different 90mm macro lenses (tho they aren't both available in all mounts). The more expensive one (approx. $650) is internal focusing, has VC image stabilization, uses their faster USD focus drive, has full time manual focus (override AF), and has a three stage focus limiter. The less expensive one is not IF, doesn't have VC, uses a slower micro motor focus drive that doesn't provide full time manual focus override and has a simple, two stage focus limiter.
Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm macro lens is typically the least expensive (currently on sale for $350). However.... IMPORTANT: the Nikon mount version does not have an in-lens focus motor, so can only autofocus on cameras that provide focus drive with an in-body focus motor (i.e., it will be a manual focus only lens on the D3000/D5000-series cameras, among others). In mounts for camera systems other than Nikon this lens has a slower type of micro motor built into the lens itself. It is not IF, the versions with built-in motor use a slower/noisier micro motor, has a "focus clutch" mechanism that requires you shift it out of AF mode to MF mode before manual focusing, doesn't have any images stabilization and has a simple, two stage focus limiter.
- Regarding image stabilization... it's of limited help at higher magnifications. Don't expect much from it at full 1:1. It can provide 3 to 4 stops of assistance when using the lens at non-macro distances.
- Regarding focus drive.... lenses that use an ultrasonic form of AF drive are faster and quieter than lenses that use a micro motor. However, all macro lenses are slower focusing because they have to move their focusing elements a long, long way to be able to focus from infinity to 1:1 at about 12 inches (90, 100, 105mm lenses) from the film/sensor plane of the camera. Also, macro lenses typically use "long throw focus" design that emphasizes accuracy over speed, because depth of field can be very shallow and intolerant of any focus error at high magnifications.
Ultrasonic forms of AF drive also allow "full time manual" override... which can be especially handy when shooting macro. For example, this means you can simply fine tune with manual focus or can deliberately de-focus the lens to cause AF to re-focus at any time, without concern. Micro motor lenses don't allow this. You have to switch off AF, set them to MF before it's possible to focus them manually. In fact, with their Focus Clutch" design, the Tokina's manual focus ring is disconnected and does nothing when the lens is set to AF. Other micro motor lenses might not fully disconnect the manual focus ring, but it shouldn't be used when the lens is set to AF or the mechanisms might be damaged.
- Regarding focus limiters.... these allow the user to restrict the lens' AF to working within a certain focus range, in order to speed up the focus performance. The simpler ones have just a single reduced range setting (it varies depending upon the lens) and full range setting. The more sophisticated ones offer a couple different restricted ranges, along with the full range setting. For example, they might have one setting that restricts the lens to non-macro distances, another that restricts it to only high magnification range, and the full range setting.
- Regarding internal focusing.... a lens with this does not increase in length when focused closer, further reducing the distance between the subject and the front of the lens at the highest magnifications. However, IF lenses start out larger. Non-IF lenses can be more compact when focused to infinity, but may double in length or nearly so, when focused to full 1:1. IF lenses also actually change their focal length a bit when focused closer, though this isn't something you notice when using them.
I use Canon gear with six different macro and close-up lenses, on both crop and full frame cameras: 45mm, 60mm (crop only), 90mm, 100mm, 180mm and an ultra high magnification 65mm. My 100mm is by far my most used, especially on full frame. (60mm is quite compact so I carry and use it fairly often too, but only on APS-C crop cameras.)
Someone mention tripod collars and that's another feature I really like on a macro lens. I often use a tripod or at least a monopod with my macro lenses. HOWEVER, among what's available for Nikon, you'd have to go to a 150mm, 180mm or 200mm macro before you can get a lens with a tripod ring. AFAIK, no shorter focal length macro for Nikon are avail. with a t'pod ring. (It's one of the things I like about my Canon... Both their avail. 100mm's can optionally be fitted with a ring, and I've done so with mine. My 65mm and 180mm both also have tripod rings).
Hope this helps you decide!
I don't use and can't compare Nikon's Micro lenses. They have an excellent reputation, but appear to also be rather high priced. Among the, I'd think the 85mm or 105mm would be the best choices for "general purpose" macro, for the reasons described above. Aside from that, I don't know their other features, AF performance, etc.
)...For your first/only macro lens I'd recommend focal lengths in the 90, 100, 105mm range on a full frame camera (crop cameras can use 60mm and 70mm, too). This is just a good compromise for general purpose, "walk around" macro shooting. Shorter and longer focal length macro are available, but tend to be a bit more specialized or limiting in their uses.
Any shorter and you'll be very close to many small subjects. (But this can be good for indoor "tabletop studio" work, with controlled lighting.)
Any longer gets a lot harder to hold steady without a tripod. Depth of field is very shallow and you end up stopping down more, using slower shutter speeds to compensate... compounding the problem. (But long focal lengths can be necessary for especially shy subjects.... or critters that bite or sting and/or are venemous!)
You really don't need to worry much about image quality.... pretty much all the macros available are capable of making very high quality images. It's their focal lengths, prices and other features that set them apart from each other.
The Sigma 105mm is very attractive at it's current sale price (about $570). That's a huge $400 discount off what it was selling for not long ago (when it was one of the highest priced). I suspect Sigma is clearing the shelves for a new model coming soon. But the current model is very good and is one of the most full featured available, with: internal focusing (doesn't increase in length when focused closer), OS image stabilization (two modes), Sigma's faster HSM ultrasonic focus drive, and a three stage focus limiter.
Tamron actually makes two different 90mm macro lenses (tho they aren't both available in all mounts). The more expensive one (approx. $650) is internal focusing, has VC image stabilization, uses their faster USD focus drive, has full time manual focus (override AF), and has a three stage focus limiter. The less expensive one is not IF, doesn't have VC, uses a slower micro motor focus drive that doesn't provide full time manual focus override and has a simple, two stage focus limiter.
Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm macro lens is typically the least expensive (currently on sale for $350). However.... IMPORTANT: the Nikon mount version does not have an in-lens focus motor, so can only autofocus on cameras that provide focus drive with an in-body focus motor (i.e., it will be a manual focus only lens on the D3000/D5000-series cameras, among others). In mounts for camera systems other than Nikon this lens has a slower type of micro motor built into the lens itself. It is not IF, the versions with built-in motor use a slower/noisier micro motor, has a "focus clutch" mechanism that requires you shift it out of AF mode to MF mode before manual focusing, doesn't have any images stabilization and has a simple, two stage focus limiter.
- Regarding image stabilization... it's of limited help at higher magnifications. Don't expect much from it at full 1:1. It can provide 3 to 4 stops of assistance when using the lens at non-macro distances.
- Regarding focus drive.... lenses that use an ultrasonic form of AF drive are faster and quieter than lenses that use a micro motor. However, all macro lenses are slower focusing because they have to move their focusing elements a long, long way to be able to focus from infinity to 1:1 at about 12 inches (90, 100, 105mm lenses) from the film/sensor plane of the camera. Also, macro lenses typically use "long throw focus" design that emphasizes accuracy over speed, because depth of field can be very shallow and intolerant of any focus error at high magnifications.
Ultrasonic forms of AF drive also allow "full time manual" override... which can be especially handy when shooting macro. For example, this means you can simply fine tune with manual focus or can deliberately de-focus the lens to cause AF to re-focus at any time, without concern. Micro motor lenses don't allow this. You have to switch off AF, set them to MF before it's possible to focus them manually. In fact, with their Focus Clutch" design, the Tokina's manual focus ring is disconnected and does nothing when the lens is set to AF. Other micro motor lenses might not fully disconnect the manual focus ring, but it shouldn't be used when the lens is set to AF or the mechanisms might be damaged.
- Regarding focus limiters.... these allow the user to restrict the lens' AF to working within a certain focus range, in order to speed up the focus performance. The simpler ones have just a single reduced range setting (it varies depending upon the lens) and full range setting. The more sophisticated ones offer a couple different restricted ranges, along with the full range setting. For example, they might have one setting that restricts the lens to non-macro distances, another that restricts it to only high magnification range, and the full range setting.
- Regarding internal focusing.... a lens with this does not increase in length when focused closer, further reducing the distance between the subject and the front of the lens at the highest magnifications. However, IF lenses start out larger. Non-IF lenses can be more compact when focused to infinity, but may double in length or nearly so, when focused to full 1:1. IF lenses also actually change their focal length a bit when focused closer, though this isn't something you notice when using them.
I use Canon gear with six different macro and close-up lenses, on both crop and full frame cameras: 45mm, 60mm (crop only), 90mm, 100mm, 180mm and an ultra high magnification 65mm. My 100mm is by far my most used, especially on full frame. (60mm is quite compact so I carry and use it fairly often too, but only on APS-C crop cameras.)
Someone mention tripod collars and that's another feature I really like on a macro lens. I often use a tripod or at least a monopod with my macro lenses. HOWEVER, among what's available for Nikon, you'd have to go to a 150mm, 180mm or 200mm macro before you can get a lens with a tripod ring. AFAIK, no shorter focal length macro for Nikon are avail. with a t'pod ring. (It's one of the things I like about my Canon... Both their avail. 100mm's can optionally be fitted with a ring, and I've done so with mine. My 65mm and 180mm both also have tripod rings).
Hope this helps you decide!
I don't use and can't compare Nikon's Micro lenses. They have an excellent reputation, but appear to also be rather high priced. Among the, I'd think the 85mm or 105mm would be the best choices for "general purpose" macro, for the reasons described above. Aside from that, I don't know their other features, AF performance, etc.
Check out Drone Video and Photography Forum section of our forum.
Sep 6, 2018 17:13:51 #
Sep 6, 2018 17:15:13 #
I have an old Sakar(?) lens from my film days. 28-80 zoom plus a macro ring for super close up. Between the zoom ring, focus ring and macro rings I can get pics without bending down and creaking my old bones. M42 mount and kind of heavy, but it gets me better macro than any other lens I have seen with alleged macro ability.
Sep 6, 2018 17:32:25 #
freiff, your technique, and knowledge of your subject's idiosyncrasies are much more important than a brand name. Attached find a sample macro taken with that 1980's manual focus macro lens. This is a life-sized image. If you click on the (download) hyperlink and then again on the cursor, you will magnify the image and be able to see the eye facets. I have yet to find any true macro lens that doesn't deliver. Personally, I look to save money whenever possible. That said, the choice of what to get is yours. I simply want to point out that brand is of little value. Concentrate more on features that are important to you. Don't be fooled by review sites like DxO as oft times those sites bench test the optics and there is no way one can duplicate those results in the field...
Sep 6, 2018 17:46:48 #
frjeff
Loc: Mid-Michigan
You UHH responders are astonishingly helpful. My gratitude!!
Will continue to study all of the helps on this site and make my decision.
Right now, must concentrate the dollars on next week’s departure for our six week journey to Australia and New Zealand. Will be plenty busy with non-macro shooting while there.
And, most important, I will keep the wife happy if I don’t spend money on glass right now.
Will continue to study all of the helps on this site and make my decision.
Right now, must concentrate the dollars on next week’s departure for our six week journey to Australia and New Zealand. Will be plenty busy with non-macro shooting while there.
And, most important, I will keep the wife happy if I don’t spend money on glass right now.
Check out True Macro-Photography Forum section of our forum.
Sep 6, 2018 18:05:38 #
What wonderful places to go and to shoot macro images. There are critters there that exist nowhere else on earth and to me it would be a once-in-a-lifetime event to visit those two countries with all their splendor. Australia also has some of the most dangerous animals, insects and reptiles on earth as well so be careful where you tread.
Here's the website of Alex Wild Photography and his eye-popping macro photography to give you inspiration for your upcoming trip. https://www.alexanderwild.com/
Here's the website of Alex Wild Photography and his eye-popping macro photography to give you inspiration for your upcoming trip. https://www.alexanderwild.com/
Sep 7, 2018 08:45:45 #
I have a Sigma 105mm macro lens, and like it a lot. If you are looking at the used market, there are two versions out there: the older one without stabilization, and the newer one with. If you are using it hand-held, stabilization is good to have. By all means get a set of extension tubes, but to use with the macro lens rather than instead of. If you get the tubes, get metal ones and make sure they have the contacts to give you the electrical connections, otherwise you will be operating fully manually. Good luck: it's an addictive habit, but at least it's pretty harmless.
Sep 7, 2018 10:32:59 #
I utilize the Nikon 105 and the Tamron 180 for macro. Different focusing distances.
Sep 7, 2018 14:38:46 #
CO wrote:
Since you shoot with a DX sensor Nikon don't overlook the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 AF-S DX micro. It's lighter than full frame macro lenses and will balance better on the D7200. It has 1:1 magnification and the minimum focusing distance is 11.3 inches.
Luv my 85 mm f3.5. Use it as a walk around lens on both my D7200 and D500.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.