Do any of the nikon zooms or primes work well for macro? Example. 35-70 2.8
Do you think the tamron 90 macro is a good starter lens?
Is the nikon just amazing? The reviews look that way.
Does the VR really help?
I read that macro shooting should be with a tripod. What do you think?
Of the purpose-designed macro lenses, the
"worst" of them is outstanding - there aren't any bad (or even average) macro lenses from Nikon, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Zeiss or even Phoenix. Naturally the best of them are in the "legends" category.
The Tamron 90 is an excellent starter macro lens.
I have the 55/f2.8 AIS Micro-Nikkor, Tamron 90/f2.8 and 200/f4 Micro-Nikkor, as well as the 35-70/f2.8 AFD. (Connie did say that it was addictive, didn't she?) The 35-70/f2.8 is a fine lens in its normal range, but it's just not as good when in macro mode. However, it's not bad, and occasionally one needs a "wide angle" (relative to most macro) view - and the 35-70/f2.8 can serve the purpose.
VR helps, but not really much in macro (meaning somewhere between 1:4 and 1:1). The problem is that VR addresses motion in the side-ways or up-down directions, but macro has such thin DOF that it is important not to move in the forward-backward direction. VR doesn't address that. As a result, using a tripod is a pretty good idea. I pretty much don't do macro work without a honkin' tripod.