Hello everyone, I'm new here and would like to know your opinions on macro lenses for Nikon.
I currently have D80 with Nikkor VR18-200mm and looking to add a good macro lens. I'm looking to make photos of insects, so I need really sharp lens which can produce clear details. Any advise would be appreciated.

Thank you!!

Depending on your budget, Nikon's 105mm Micro (that's what they call it but it is a macro lens) is a great one. I've shot with the older version and it's an amazing lens. The newest version has VR too.

I was looking at it, it's a little pricey for me at this point. Is there anything else comparable to this lense, but may be cheaper? I know, you get what you paid for, and that's my problem. LOL I don't want to spend money on lesser quality, but if it's preformane good, why not?

I have the Sigma 105mm f2.8 Macro and I've been pleased with it. Sigma makes good lenses for the money. If I had the money, I'd opt for the Nikon version:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=8456&A=details&Q=&sku=424744&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

Or better yet, the 200mm Nikon:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=66989&is=USA&addedTroughType=search

I was looking at it, it's a little pricey for me at this point. Is there anything else comparable to this lense, but may be cheaper? I know, you get what you paid for, and that's my problem. LOL I don't want to spend money on lesser quality, but if it's preformane good, why not?

hallo:)

i own d sigma 105 wid my d80 n tell u wat its an awesome piece of glass for that money..go for it n i wud suggest it over the nikkor! all the nikkor has got is VR..since u wilb shootin macro, u wl need a tripod rather than the VR..i shoot with the sigma daily n its realy a terrific lens.

~highly recommended n trust me..u will luv it all d more!:)

cheers..

Everything in your initial post screams "extension tubes!" to me :p Check out my thread explaining the benefits, uses, and limitation in the Nature and Wildlife forum.

I see it being suited for you because:

1) you already have a zoom with ideal focal lengths (100mm to 200mm)
2) you already have a lens with VR
3) you can't get any less expensive than generic tubes
4) you intend to shoot insects

The insects in my website are all shot using accessories (either tubes or teleconverters on "normal" lenses). And most are shot hand-held (benefits of VR or IS with accessories). Finally bought a dedicated macro recently. Haven't had a chance to get real field work out of it yet.

hi
do you think it is more economical to buy an extension tube for a mid range zoom lens, or buy a macro lens in addition to the zoom lens? or buy macro lens plus tubes? :p

also, what influences your pick of extension tube length?

thanks

i have the nikon 60mm 2.8 macro lense. Its a great lense ( more for flowers, mushrooms etc) but for insects youd need more reach ( lense further from subject) and because of this id go with loupy and use extension tubes on your current lense. you can always use them later to if you do get a dedicated macro lense with a longer focal distance for greater magnification.

can you get a closer focus with a macro lens, or a closer focus using an extension tube?

it depends, each lense has its own closest focus distance ( i think with my macro its 8 inches) but with longer ones, 105, or 200mm it may be something like 3-5 feet, but its still a 1:1 ratio. tubes depend on what lense your using, but always lessen the distance and dof of said lense being used.

well, which combination has the absolute closest focal distance?

lets say i wanted to take a pic of your salamander, and i wanted it to completely fill the camera lens, but i want it in nice high detail. do you use the macro lens plus tube, zoom lens plus tube, or something else?

thanks

it depends on to many factors to tell you an answer. many things come in to play that change for each lense and tube. minimum focus distance, length of lense, reproduction ratio, size of subject, tube size ( you can stack more than 1 tube and they come in different sizes).

there are many ways to achieve the same results to. but using my macro lense and tubes i have filled the full frame with the year on a penny. but i was like 2 mm away from the penny and the dof was non existent, and it was hard to get light to hit it correctly etc.

you basically have to experiment and see what works for you for what you want to shoot, cause obviously the penny set up isn't going to work for insects, but it would for say flower parts in a studio.



and btw i think what you want to know ( filling the frame ) is not actually the closest focal distance.... thats simply how far away the lense needs to be from the object to focus on it. when you add that in to the reproduction ratio ( life size is 1:1) then you start to be able to fill the frame vie different settings.

so what influences your choice of extension tube length?

I haven't used tubes too often, but the longer the tube the closer you can focus. However, with a tube, you're just shifting the minimum and maximum focusing points so you probably won't be able to focus to infinity with it on (no problem here, just to explain how they work).

Getting too close isn't always a good thing; you can block the light if you're within a couple/few inches. This is why longer focal lengths are great. Nikon's 200mm (http://nikonusa.com/template.php?cat=1&grp=5&productNr=1989) is 1:1 at 19.4" which is the minimum focusing distance. You could focus closer than that with an extension tube, and have even more than 1:1 (larger than life size). With a shorter focal length you'd have to get closer to get 1:1, like about 8" on their 60mm lens. Start adding on extension tubes and you're almost touching the subject with the lens...

Kenko has a set of three tubes (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375238-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGN_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html), I haven't used it but this is probably what I'd buy.

I love my Tokina 100mm/2.8 macro for up close and portrait work.

I've been taking macro photos since about 1984 or so. I would not consider myself anything more than a hobbyist who likes to take macro photographs. I've learned a few things along the way:

Subject to lens distance increases as the focal length increases with the reproduction ratio remaining the same and the depth of field (DOF) decreases with this increase in focal length.
Camera shake at high magnification, just like shooting with a long lens, is magnified and can become a problem.
Focusing can be a problem with the reduced DOF, stopping down helps but this slows the shutter speed which can result in shake-induced blur. With digital you can take a few hundred photos of the same subject and get a few workable photos.
Reverse-mounting a wide-angle lens will give you magnification, especially if used with an extension tube. This is supposed to increase your subject distance, too, if I'm not mistaken.

Your D80 will lose its metering if you mount your AF lens on to an extension tube just like my D70 does. This opens up the possibility of using MF lenses specifically for macro purposes but this increases the cost as you will then have a specialty lens that you would not use otherwise. Taking pictures without a meter is a simple matter of trial-and-error until you find the right exposure using the rear screen to see how the exposure looks and adjusting before your next shot. That's the beauty of digital!

The attached uncropped picture was taken with a 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5 lens reverse mounted using a BR-2a reversing ring on to an old M2 extension tube (27.5mm, the M2 was replaced with the PK13 extension tube some years ago). The lens was at the 50mm zoom setting, I believe, probably at f/11 or f/16, shooting in direct sunlight at 1/60 sec. That spider is only about 3/8" across (about 10mm) and he fills the frame in this picture.

Kenko and maybe others have auto extension tubes that you don't lose your metering with. Still advisable to use manual focus, however.

My experience with macro is limited. I have the Nikkor 105 VR lens. It works well for macro if you turn VR off and use a tripod. The VR does not work good for close up work, focus hunts too much. Turn the VR off and AF works very well.

It's also a very good portrait lens for head shots. Nice and sharp. The VR function works as expected at longer distances.

Have not used extension tubes. Don't you lose a stop ot two by using the extension tube?

Have not used extension tubes. Don't you lose a stop ot two by using the extension tube?

The extent of the light loss is a function of the amount of extension in comparison to the focal length of the lens used.

Since usually the tube-to-focal length ratio is typically in the 1:4 to 1:3 range, the light loss is not that significant. Evident yes but not that significant.

This loss is very pronounced when one uses bellows.


And, as Frog mentioned, I would suggest ALWAYS using manual focus when shooting macros. The focus is so critical that I would never trust that the camera is focusing on what I think should be in focus. I can't recall a single incident when I thought "hmm, I'm glad I have AF for this shot".