I need a new Macro lens

Joined
Jan 1, 2012
Messages
9
Location
Denver, Co
I am interested in buying a new Macro lens. Which would you guys suggest? I will only use this occasionally but all of my other lens' AFS 18-105, 55-300, 18-135, just don't fit the bill. I'm looking for a lens for flowers, outside close-up pic.s. Any suggestions? Sorry I didn't include that I shoot the Nikon D90
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
5,336
Location
Ireland
Real Name
(Mike) Michael Skerritt.
Nikon 60mm G 2.8 A wonderful lens or a little cheaper the Sig 105mm f2.8. for a lot more money and to work at a further distance from your subject.The Sig 150mm OS 2.8 or the 180mm OS f2.8.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
3,531
Location
Thornhill, Ontario, a suburb of Toronto
When you say "new" do you mean a lens of modern vintage, or just new for you?
If you are willing to manual focus, I'd suggest a Micro-Nikkor 105 f4 or Micro-Nikkor 200 f4 lens. Both manual focus, and tack sharp. and they are available at reasonable cost (especially the 105) from KEH (www.keh.com)
I've had the 105 for over 25 years and it take exceptionally fine images.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,500
Location
Los Angeles, CA
What body do you shoot?
For occasional use, I'd go for the Nikkor 55 3.5 AIS. You can get a used one at KEH for about $80 and you can program it on bodies like D700, D800, D7000 so it meters correctly. It may not have enough reach for bugs but it's great as a general purpose macro lens for flowers and product detail shots. Best of all, it's affordable.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
33
Location
LA, California
You didn't say which camera you're using, but if it's a Nikon, check out the 40mm F2.8 micro lens. The price is reasonable, under $300 and the results are great.


Bob
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2012
Messages
1,299
Location
Idaho
If you are shooting full-frame and can afford it, consider the Nikon 105 f/2.8 VR. Not only is it an excellent macro lens, but it also doubles as an exceptional short-tele!
 
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
3,961
Location
Chicago
macro like other lenses, have differing angles of view.

You can move in close to a flower using a 50, then see WIDE BACKGROUND.

You can shoot the same flower from further back seeing less angular background.

All nikon micros are excellent lenses. Macro lenses are the common lenses and they see a big picture. Nikon properly names theirs micro or lenses for small views.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2008
Messages
4,069
Location
Bellingham, WA
I have the Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro and I LOVE it.

Carole

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,547
Location
Famington Hills, MI
This is the one lens area that fascinates me. Almost across the macro prime board the quality is extremely high and the differences are only things like focal length, reproduction rate, and aperture speed. I have no clue why I haven't pulled the trigger on one but I really would like to have one of the Sigma 150mm. Either the previous generation without OS or the new one with OS. It's hard to go wrong with any macro prime these days.
 
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Messages
3,400
Location
New York City
This is the one lens area that fascinates me. Almost across the macro prime board the quality is extremely high and the differences are only things like focal length, reproduction rate, and aperture speed. I have no clue why I haven't pulled the trigger on one but I really would like to have one of the Sigma 150mm. Either the previous generation without OS or the new one with OS. It's hard to go wrong with any macro prime these days.
This is absolutely true. Pick your focal length, pick your price range, there's your answer. The longer your focal length, the greater working distance you have between you and your subject. Are you shooting products? Working distance doesn't matter so much; 50 or 60mm is fine. Are you shooting things that can bite or sting you? Give them as much room as you can; think 90-200mm!
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
2,314
Location
GA
This is absolutely true. Pick your focal length, pick your price range, there's your answer. The longer your focal length, the greater working distance you have between you and your subject. Are you shooting products? Working distance doesn't matter so much; 50 or 60mm is fine. Are you shooting things that can bite or sting you? Give them as much room as you can; think 90-200mm!
Exactly. A lot of good choices out there from $100 ebay specials to $2000 long macros.
 
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
446
Location
Central Arkansas
I second Carole's recommendation. There are 4 AF versions for Nikon. The first is the f2.5 AF that only does 1:2 reproduction. Then there are the 2 2.8 AF versions that do not have a built in motor and finally the new 2.8 with built in motor that all reproduce at 1:1.

I have the first 2.8 version and it plays well with the Kenko Pro 300 1.4 TC resulting in about 125mm focal length and also works well with Kenko extension tubes to go larger than 1:1.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom