Barry, what will be your primary use for a macro lens? If you are shooting stamps, or coins, maybe jewelry then the 60mm may be best. Flowers and occasional bugs the 100-105 works well. and skittish or dangerous critters then 180 or the 200 mm lens would be advised. The smaller the subject, the less you will use VR or auto focus with. But if the lens does double duty as a portrait lens, then maybe good to have those features. Most users do not shoot all that often with a macro lens. So good used copies are in abundance.

I have that bellows, and that same enlarger lens. But a bellows is awkward in the field, as well as delicate? Maybe I am enthused with the possibilities of that Canon MP-E 64mm lens? A lot of macro in one package. Though the critics have said 4X is great, 5X not so much. Basically the Canon lens is a reversed zoom lens with optics optimized for one use: macro.

Good idea DaveC, to machine an adapter. I also have a home machine shop so can do. BUT there is the nagging issue of no aperture control. That is the stickler. The best idea I have tried so far is to get a used 25-50mm F4 AIs zoom lens and reverse it with a BR-2a ring and a 72 to 52mm step-down ring. Use a BR-6 adapter on the zoom lens mount flange surface allows the use of a double cable release to allow you to focus wide open, then depress the twin cable release button to first stop down then expose the image. And the BR-6 provides some protection to the zoom lens exposed optics which are close to the surface. I get from about 1X to 3X with that rig. Let me know how that Laowa lens works out for you.

The only advantage I can think of is to be able to command your other flashes without an on camera light source being visible in in some reflective surface that points back at the camera. I have run into that at times when shooting a building interior with lots of glass surfaces. I can minimize my own presence in that manor, and avoid a hot spot that may detract from the image. Also handy in macro work where the macro lens casts a noticeable shadow from the little on camera flash that is too close to the lens axis. If you had a Nikon body without the popup flash it would be quite useful. But your D7200 has that little flash built in. I am sure others here can come up with more situations.

I posted the question because I wanted to try the Canon MP-E 65mm micro lens. 1:1 at low magnification, up to 5X at the high end. Strictly closeup use. Nikon does not offer a lens of that design in a macro lens. High magnification macro is not really mainstream. And that lens is an EF lens, never made in other various Canon mounts. There is no doubt that Nikon and Canon lenses have many excellent lenses for sale. To bad Canon dissed its customers by coming out with many versions of mounts so its' customers need to buy the newest lens for the newest camera. Kind of sad? I like being able to use some lenses from the sixties on my Nikon bodies with no adapters. But that one Canon macro lens is the only one of the offerings from Canon that interests me. Since it appears there is no adapter I will just have to pass on that lens. I do prefer Nikon for many reasons, but that is not the point of this posting. We have such a variety of camera brands to choose from, makes for fun times.

I hear yah Harry0, yeah if I decide to get that lens I will just buy a Canon body to go with. But honestly 10 feet is plenty close as I expect to be working in terms of inches to less than an inch in distance! BUT, will it give me electronic aperture control? That is the hangup I think. I can go to 20X, and way more, with the equipment I possess, but it requires elaborate mixed optics which outside of the studio is insane to work with. Kind of nice to have up to 5X at my finger tips, though one needs a tripod and a focus rail of course. DO any Canon users know if that lens was ever made in the version that used a mechanical aperture setting and a stop down lever? That would be easiest to work with on a Nikon. I know such animals exist and are used cross-platform in macro work, but no idea if Canon ever made this lens in that earlier technology. Any way to control the electronic aperture outside of the camera body? I never owned a Canon so need to seek the wisdom of others.

I am not all that familiar with the various Canon lens variations. But it does NOT seem that those adapters allow for an EF lens which I think the MP-e lens is? I assume that translates to an electronic aperature like the Nikon G lenses? I had seen those adapters and ruled them out a long time ago, but thanks for looking them up.
If I did purchase one, I would remove the optics within it. I would not want to contaminate the factory optic train of the Canon lens with most likely inferior elements, just to gain infinite focus (which is impossible with the MP-e lens anyways). I am working only with high magnifications. I may end up saving my money and buying a Canon system, with an older body, just to try it out for fun. I have used Nikon since the sixties, hate to make that change though. Thanks for all the thoughtful suggestions so far!

Yes I considered getting a Canon body. But I also have lots of Nikon flash from the SB-900 to the R1-C1 system. I always like Nikon best for their flash systems. ANd I would not want to change that.

Mea culpa ! I know that I am speaking heresy, suggesting the use of a Canon lens on a Nikon body. But that special Canon lens: MP-e 65mm, zooms from 1:1 to 5X magnification. No extension needed, and optimized optically for macro. The lens cannot focus even to 1:2, it is made for only high magnification macro. No stand-alone Nikon lens can do that. I wish Nikon would come out with something similar but they even stopped producing the 200 mm micro-nikkor! And I own the three basic Micro Nikkors anyways. The Nikon offerings can do 1:1 at most. I have been able to achieve 3.5X and much more by using various combinations of lenses and a bellows. But the Canon lens is self contained. Not an engineering miracle by any means, but Nikon seems to have dropped out of the macro field for now. And yes, macro work going over 1:1 needs a focus rail, I have that covered as well.
I do not want to adapt screw mount lenses to my nikon, thank you. I am not looking to save money all that much. I think the only other lens that came close to the Canon was a rare Minolta macro lens, but that was not better optically than what I have now. I had asked a similar question to this in a macro forum, and got no answers, so now broadening my search.

I understand the issues of not being able to focus at infinity. I am only wishing to use a Canon MP-e 65mm macro lens on my Nikon Fx body, so no need to use for anything but macro! A little extra extension caused by the adapter may not be an issue. I have seen hints that there are such animals out there. But I cannot seem to locate one mainstream. I guess the biggest issues will involve electronically controlling the aperture? Strictly manual focus is never a problem for Macro work, I do that all the time with even my micro nikkor lenses. So hoping someone has an answer for me besides using a Canon body.

I would like the D810 book for $10 shipped to me. Let me know?

All good cameras. Maybe the D7200 if price matters, D7500 maybe not worth the extra money. D500 is more rugged and better weather seals. That would be my choice if I thought I would be roughing it. A great camera body. The D750 is also good, but the smaller format is lighter, and you do need the more expensive, and bulkier Fx lenses for it.
Another idea: bring black electrical tape. Put a small piece over the nikon name and any other identifiers. Make it look a little banged up and less tempting to a thief?

Since it is a destination wedding, I assume the wedding party and family/friend presence will not be huge. Candids through the day should not be beyond your ability. You said a pro will shoot the ceremony, so you have that covered. No reason you should not be able to do a good job. I speak as a retired full time wedding photographer. I shot both of my children's weddings. BUT I hired two of my assistants for each wedding. Certain times I had to do father duties, like escorting the bride down the aisle, and the assistants took over. Yeah I had several days post processing work but I was used to that chore, no biggie. My children were delighted with their albums, and I was proud to have added my own touch to the end results.
Use the Nikon D610, with the 35-70 zoom lens, and the SB-700 flash. Study up to learn the iTTL settings, and maybe ITTL-BL too on that flash, those settings work well and are easy as long as you know how to get to the programs you want without struggling with the buttons if something gets accidentally changed while jostling about on the trip! You may find the Program camera setting to work well with that model camera if you feel challenged making last minute decisions while shooting. Amazing what our cameras computer brain can do. You may not want to haul any more cameras with you. Too difficult on a trip. Just protect that one camera through the trip. The pro should not mind you helping get people together, and you shooting some insurance shots through the ceremony. As long as you do not make yourself into a PITA, he will welcome the assistance and the backup.
If I were getting paid as a pro, I would have two (or three) of every essential piece of equipment minimum. But you do not want to worry about two remembering two different camera systems while under the pressure of producing perfect images. If you had two Nikon D610's, lenses, and flash heads then that would be ideal. But if the camera died by a quirk of fate, the smart phone can come to the rescue? Not likely that would ever happen though if you protect the D610, it is a well made camera. Best Wishes!

I have the same upgrade lens you are considering, and like it a lot. BUT it is heavier and bulkier than your current lens. The F4 version does a quite commendable job optically, so you are not really gaining with the faster lens on that basis alone. I bought my F2.8 to shoot candids indoors without flash, for snipers like me it works great and the bokeh is nice wide open too! But I wonder: how often will the faster lens get used if you get tired lugging it around? Myself I have a light zoom similar to yours for fun shooting when I carry it all day.

It would be crazy for any large camera manufacturer to approve any batteries other than their own. Yeah the OEM corp. realizes that most aftermarket batteries are safe but to make any statement other than forbid them would be crazy because then the camera maker would have to honor damage caused by every battery out there with no input or control on them. Would any corporation be dumb enough to assume those risks?
So the final users must assume the risk for their own actions, and get to make the final decision: is a cheaper battery safe for his camera. As far as amp-hour ratings and voltage, those numbers are very arbitrary. There are so many ways to represent those values that even an Electrical Engineer would be stumped unless he could talk to the techs that design and build the aftermarket batteries, as well as the camera manufacturer, in order to know the correct answer. Yah roll the dice and take your chances!