Macro lens suggestions

frankyrivera

frankyrivera

FUP&A Member
So I'm not sure how many dslr shooters on this block but I would love some input on choosing a good macro lens. I'll list what I've come up with and open the floor up to any suggestions. Note these are all true 1:1 macros

Nikon 105mm 2.8 $899
Nikon 85mm 3.5 $527
Sigma 105mm 2.8 $769
Tamron 180mm 3.5 $739
Tamron 90mm 2.8 $499
Tokina 100mm $489

The difference lies in the aperture and focal length. Some are internal focusing while others are external. How much is enough as far as focal length is concerned, is there a minimum or maximum for a good working distance. Please help. I'm assuming the Nikon 105mm 2.8 is the all around winner however the price is also the steepest and at the top of my price range. Any help is appreciated thanks
 
I've had the Nikon 60mm and Sigma 150mm APO (not the new OS). I liked the sigma better for tank pictures because of the extra reach. Clarity was excellent as well. It got really good reviews in digital photography magazine. Check out kenrockwell.com for reviews on the Nikons. Or do a search for reviews by photo magazines for each one.
 
I have been up for two days reading reviews and comparing on line however I like getting feedback from people who've tried different brands or own them or just heard pros or cons
 
I just upgraded my phone to the galaxy 3 and the camera has a macro option awesome pics i know its off subject
 
You can't beat the Nikkor lenses for build quality (focus speed, VR, etc.) but if you're doing tripod work via manual focus - it seems like the Sigma could compare favorably. The Sigma appears well reviewed. I use the Micro-Nikkor 70-180mm. Functions as both quality macro glass and passable long range action when I'm taking shots of the kids.
 
The Tamrons have great reviews as well. I've never shot with Nikkor glass, but I'd imagine that it's comparable to Canon lenses. I had a Sigma 105mm and I was a bit disappointed because it seemed to lack the clarity of my Tamron & Canon lenses. If money isn't that huge of a factor, I'd opt for the Nikkor 105mm, followed by the Tamron 90mm and then the Nikkor 85mm. The Tamron 180mm is a bit excessive and would be great for stuff like individual polyps and other macro work, but you'd have difficulty getting good images of slightly larger subjects. If your tank was 3' deep, that might be a different story, but with a 75g, you'll probably find yourself backing the camera up from the tank. I'm completely unfamiliar with the Tokina lens, so I wouldn't rule that out without doing a bit of research first.
 
Thanks guys exactly the feedback I was looking for. Thanks Scott I figured the 180 wAs a bit much I keep getting good reviews on the tamron but when reading on the tokina it is said that they were designed and built by Nikon engineers as well and head to head with tamron
 
I have had mixed luck with the Tamron lenses that I have for my Canon. My biggest frustration with it is that they aren't fast enough. I believe they bottom out at f 3.5. Which is adequate if you are outside taking pictures of flowers or bugs in full sun. However it can be challenging under actinic lighting if you are trying to shoot a quick moving fish.

I would go for the lens that gives you the fastest possible imaging speed under low light conditions. In this case either the Sigma or Nikon glass.

Popular Photography does detailed reviews of most lenses that are out on the market place.
http://www.popphoto.com/reviews

Also, you can check out the photography forum on RC. Macro lenses are debated ad nauseum there.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=118
 
You could rent a lens for 20-50 for 5-7 days and try them out? I believe the price includes shipping to and from with the appropriate insurance too. Google lens rental
 
I suggest looking at the Tamron 172E 90mm Macro. It is the previous model to the one with the built in motor and can be found for under $300. The 172E does not have the motor. IMO, AF is not so important when shooting in macro.
 
The Nikon is an awesome lens with internal focus. I am using the Tokina on my d90 and have no complaints. The only downfall is its external focus.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
 
Nikon 105 2.8 best lens Ive ever owned I bought a nikon pkg with sigma lenses I hated the pics, my point and shoot took better pics. Then I tried my first macro a Tamron , it was better than the Sigma crap, then The Nikon oh my, Now this is what I was after all along. This lens also takes the best portrait pics which was a big suprise,bonus
 
Hunkafish your killing that's really the one I want however it's also the most expensive. I was hoping people would be just as happy as you are about your nikon with other less expensive models and brands
 
So I've narrowed it down to the
Nikon 60 mm 2.8 $549
Tamron 90mm 2.8 $499
Tokina 100mm 2.8 $489.

The tamron and tokina both razor sharp and fast 2.8 and close in price
The nikon has the shortest focal length and more expensive than the other two also boasting a 2.8 but the biggest pro is its internal focusing versus the external and the other two
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dviper150
Which macro lens for Canon?
Replies
3
Views
1K
NikonN8
N
J
Canon Lens Advice
Replies
0
Views
645
JJudge951
J
dviper150
Canon macro lens
Replies
5
Views
1K
GoNoles
GoNoles
chadfarmer
Macro Lens for Canon EOS Cameras
Replies
2
Views
772
chadfarmer
chadfarmer
B
Macro lens
Replies
11
Views
3K
rickztahone
rickztahone
Back
Top