Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon  (Read 7117 times)

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4559
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« on: August 27, 2013, 10:46:45 am »

Looking for experiences and recommendations. I think I'd like something around 100mm, so the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 looks pretty good. Anything else out there for me to consider?
Logged

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #1 on: August 27, 2013, 11:02:56 am »

Looking for experiences and recommendations. I think I'd like something around 100mm, so the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 looks pretty good. Anything else out there for me to consider?

Hi Peter,

As a non-Nikon shooter myself I cannot comment on the technical quality of the 105mm one you mentioned, but it is indeed a very good focal length for many types of close-up and macro work on a 35mm full frame sensor.

It allows some room to arrange additional lighting or reflectors if needed, and it won't scare the insects if that is what you are shooting. A 105mm also still allows to expand the magnification by using an extender of reasonable dimensions, or an additional close-up lens to preserve the shorter exposures, which is useful for handheld applications.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4559
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2013, 11:41:07 am »

Thanks for your observations. I have had both 60mm and 180mm macro lenses in the past and they did not suit me - so the middle ground, around 100mm, seems ideal.
Logged

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2013, 12:35:49 pm »

Have you seen http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_spec.html ?

Based on Bjorn's recommendation I purchased a 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor. I use it on Nikon FX (D4 and D800/E) and DX cameras, and on Canon 1Dx and 1Ds Mark III bodies with an adapter. Very sharp, excellent quality  but if you are shooting things that move the lack of autofocus is a problem.

I have also used and the Nikon 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S VR Micro Nikkor and it too is excellent. In fact it is the first AF 105mm Micro-Nikkor  that I actually liked. Here is what imaging-resource thinks about it: http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/351/cat/12
Logged

Philip Weber

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 185
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2013, 02:25:57 pm »

I've used the Nikkor 105 mm micro for a number of years, currently on my D800, and have found it to be an excellent lens and would recommend it to any Nikon shooter.

That said, I'd love to see them update their 200 mm micro as it's reported to be very sharp with great optics but a relatively outdated design. I'd like a longer focal length when working with small, moving critters but would like to see it with auto focus and VR II. I may break down and try the Sigma 180 mm f/2.8 but a smaller (presumably) f/4 Nikkor at 200 mm would be my preference although as I don't shoot a lot of macro, it hasn't been a priority. 

The 105 mm is a keeper though and at that focal length, one can't go wrong. I've also heard good things about their 60 mm micro but that's too short for me.

Phil
Logged

Kyle Kielinski

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2013, 03:16:41 pm »

I have and like the 60mm Nikkor.  I've thought about getting the 105, mostly because I share equipment with my wife who prefers AF, but I have the Zeiss 100 ZF and it gets close enough for me @ 1:2 (and it's a great lens!).
Logged

Lee Rentz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2013, 04:09:36 pm »

I use Canon, so I can't speak to the Nikon equivalent, but I now use my 90mm tilt/shift lens with extension tubes for all my macro work. The ability to tilt the plane of focus in photographing say, a butterfly's wing, is truly useful. The lens is incredibly sharp and works well with extension tubes and, by tilting, I can use a wider aperture for better bokeh. I'm just starting to use Helicon Focus to improve my depth-of-field on static shots, and I anticipate using that technique and software on flowers and similar subjects, where I will use a wide aperture, but several focus points, so that I can get great depth-of-field in the foreground, with a dreamy bokeh in the background.
Logged

SeanBK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 531
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2013, 12:49:14 am »

I have Nikon D800E and have Nikon 105mm f2.8 micro VR and I recently acquired Zeiss 100mm f2. Makro planar. Naturally they both are exceptionally well made glass & they both mate very well w/D800E. The results r fantastic.
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2013, 10:14:24 am »

Looking for experiences and recommendations. I think I'd like something around 100mm, so the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 looks pretty good. Anything else out there for me to consider?

What is is you're trying to shoot, exactly?

Inanimate jewelry? Flowers? Butterlies on flowers? Moving insects in the field?

The answer to this question would help get you a better answer to your question ... as the Zeiss (for example) would be perfect for the first and terrible for the last, etc.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2013, 10:15:55 am by John Koerner »
Logged

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4559
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2013, 10:27:28 am »

What am I trying to shoot? Natural subjects for the most part, still and moving. I guess the Nikkor would be better there.
Logged

joneil

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 163
  • This is what beer does to you....
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2013, 10:47:27 am »

  I use the Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro on my D700, and i like it.   The 105mm Nikkor is a better lens mechanically - it has better auto focus IMO, and it just seems "tougher", which you can qualify anyway you like.    Optically the 90mm Tamron is very good.  Optically it might be one of Tamron's finest lenses overall.  Auto focus is slow, but for macro/micro work, I personally prefer manual focusing myself.

   But I was on a tight budget, and at the time I bought it Tamron had a sale and rebate, so the price was under half what the Nikkor was.  For me it was perfect, as I do need a Macro form time to time, but not all the time.   If you are like me, and occasionally need one on  budget, I would suggest the Tamron 90mm.     If you are going to use one all the time or for pro work, go Nikkor. 
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2013, 11:09:11 am »

What am I trying to shoot? Natural subjects for the most part, still and moving. I guess the Nikkor would be better there.


I don't shoot Nikon, I shoot Canon, but as someone who shoots 98% macro (nature shots), the principles I've learned will apply to Nikon.

This probably isn't going to be the answer you want to hear, but I personally have 3 macro lenses (100mm f/2.8L, 180mm 3.5L, and the MPE 65mm 1x-5x), and I use all 3 for different reasons.

Nikon does not have an equivalent 1x-5x lens like the Canon, but with reverse-mounting lenses, or bellows/extension tubes, you can achieve similar results. So, if you really want to get "ultra-close," and go beyond mere 1:1 magnification, these things can be handled by Nikon in a different way.

Assuming you're just speaking of 1:1 "field shots," your choice will ultimately be between the 105mm and the 200mm Nikkor lenses (or you'll ultimately get both, if you're like me). So I will try to describe the differences.

The 180mm is my favorite lens of the lot of them, as I think it takes the best overall "artistic" results. When I have a tripod, and can really take the time to compose my shots, I get the best results with the longer lens every time. This applies to nature shots where, say, I have a butterfly on a flower (or just the flower itself), because it gives me the working distance not to scare-off any live subjects ... and, because of that extra distance, I get a better, smoother bokeh because I am limiting the amount of background that needs to be rendered. Therefore, for truly nice "keepers," I think you'll repeatedly and consistently get the best results using a tripod and a 200mm. Hands down.

However, if you're hand-holding, and especially if you're dealing with moving subjects, the 200mm and a tripod will likely create more frustration and "missed shots" than anything else. In this case, the newer 105 with the VR would definitely be the way to go. Again, I have both equivalent lenses with Canon ... and I use both because each carries certain advantages the other does not ... and, if you do a lot of moving subjects, and especially if you're doing videography, the 105 with stabilization and the faster AF will be be the way to go.

Me, I tend not to bother too much with moving targets, I almost never use AF, so I prefer the 180 and leave the 100 at home (or in the bag) more often than not. If I pull out another lens, it is usually for ultra-close shots, and then I will use the MPE-65mm and a diffused Twinlight flash. But you may be after different things ...

That said, if you're only looking to get one lens, and you're working with moving targets at all, then I would start out with the 105 mm because it can still get great shots on a tripod ... and it can be pulled-off when needed & be lighter in the field, while giving you faster AF + image stabilization if you're dealing with a moving subject.

Hope this ramble helps steer you in the right direction for your own interests :)

Jack

PS: The Tamron is a fine alternative choice, image-quality-wise, but it is kinda flimsy in the build quality department. What I dislike most about the Tamron, however, is the front element extends out toward the subject, which I try to avoid myself (although I have to put up with it with the MPE 65mm).
Logged

Peter McLennan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4690
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2013, 02:27:03 pm »

I mount the 105 f4 and the 55mm f3.5 Nikkors on my D800.  Both deliver extremely sharp and very satisfying images.  I paid less than $500 for the two of them, used.  They are manual focus lenses.  I find that VR and autofocus aren't necessary since I don't often go stalking moving targets.  VR at high magnifications is disappointing in any case.

The 55 is a very useful landscape lens, since unlike some other macro lenses, it's very sharp at infinity.  I love it so much, I bought another one from KEH as a backup.

If you intend on doing extensive focus stacking, you might find that an autofocus lens is preferable because it can work with software tools like "Control My Nikon" that can automate the acquisition part of focus stacking.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2013, 08:33:14 pm by Peter McLennan »
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2013, 02:32:17 pm »

I have the Nikkor 2.8/105 AIS; I think it's pretty damned good. John Shaw, of nature and close-up books fame, used one for years - probably still does. I can't imagine much use for af on close-ups, but that's my inherent dislike of af speaking up. I use D200 and D700, the latter full-frame.

Splendid lens.

Rob C

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Macro lens for a full-frame Nikon
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2013, 02:43:39 pm »

Yeah, I almost never use AF myself ... unless in (say) servo mode following a moving ant, a fickle butterfly that won't stay still for more than a second, etc.

95% of my macro shots are on a tripod, mirror lockup, using a remote switch.

However, sometimes just trying to capture a tiny fleeting subject "at all" ... that is constantly moving ... is a huge challenge ... and in cases like that a fast AF (and IS) do come in handy.

Cheers,
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up