Macro lenses

[Scaglietti]

Hi all,
I am a newbie and this is my first post. I am thinking of getting a decent DSLR camera and a good macro lens. It is interesting to hear what people say and see the shots using the lens. I think I'll either go for the Nikon 105mm or the Tamron 90mm. May I know image quality wise, is there a major difference between the 2? I know that the Nikon AF-S 105mm macro is a fix length lens compare to the Nikon AF-D or Tamron. What are the advantages having a fix length lens compare to a variable lens one? Sorry, newbies got lots of questions. Thanks for reading.

- Luenny

Both Nikkor 105mmVR and Tamron 90mm are good lenses. You can consider Tokina 100mm too. The biggest difference is the price. With the Nikkor you get VR too.

If you shoot bugs or insect, the extension of the lens during focusing may be a problem. It can come quite close to the subject and scare them away.

BC

 

[Luenny]

The image quality will differ of course, but are you willing to spend the money for the AF-S 105VR? That's another question.

A prime lens often has better picture quality and is much lighter than a zoom. But a zoom is much lighter than a few prime lenses which are needed to cover the range of the zoom. Read up more on Prime vs Zooms.

Hi Zac08,
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. I am asking about the physical length of the lens. If you look at the Tamron 90mm Macro, the length of the lens extends or retracts as you focus, same as the Nikon AF-D 105mm Marco. But the Nikon AF-S 105mm VR have a fix length even when you're focusing. I can't really think of any advantages to this except for the fact that it causes less disturbance to the subject. Otherwise, is there any advantanges of getting fix length ones?

- Luenny

 

[Luenny]

Both Nikkor 105mmVR and Tamron 90mm are good lenses. You can consider Tokina 100mm too. The biggest difference is the price. With the Nikkor you get VR too.

If you shoot bugs or insect, the extension of the lens during focusing may be a problem. It can come quite close to the subject and scare them away.

BC

Hi BC,
Thanks for the reply. But other than scaring them away, is there any other advantages? Because I think the 105mm or 90 mm macro have 1:1 ratio at around 30cm which is quite huge. So even the extension, it shouldn't post a lot of problems. Just my 2 cents - well newbie thinking of ways to cut cost. :sweat:

- Luenny

 

[Scaglietti]

Hi BC,
Thanks for the reply. But other than scaring them away, is there any other advantages? Because I think the 105mm or 90 mm macro have 1:1 ratio at around 30cm which is quite huge. So even the extension, it shouldn't post a lot of problems. Just my 2 cents - well newbie thinking of ways to cut cost. :sweat:

- Luenny

The front of the Tamron 90mm to the subject is less than 30cm at 1:1. Should be around 10cm. The minimum focusing distance in the specs is from the subject to the sensor (not the front of lens).

BC

 

[zac08]

Hi Zac08,
I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. I am asking about the physical length of the lens. If you look at the Tamron 90mm Macro, the length of the lens extends or retracts as you focus, same as the Nikon AF-D 105mm Marco. But the Nikon AF-S 105mm VR have a fix length even when you're focusing. I can't really think of any advantages to this except for the fact that it causes less disturbance to the subject. Otherwise, is there any advantanges of getting fix length ones?

- Luenny

Oic, you meant the working distance. Yeah, the 105 is internal focusing.

Hi BC,
Thanks for the reply. But other than scaring them away, is there any other advantages? Because I think the 105mm or 90 mm macro have 1:1 ratio at around 30cm which is quite huge. So even the extension, it shouldn't post a lot of problems. Just my 2 cents - well newbie thinking of ways to cut cost. :sweat:

- Luenny

The focusing distance for the 90mm Tamron is actually 29cm. And after you minus off the 20cm of the length from the front of the lens to the image plane itself, you have only 9cm of working distance for the Tamron 90mm.

Just measured it with a tape ruler.

For the 105, you should have about 15cm working distance after the maths...

 

[Luenny]

9 cm?? Then it would make sense for people to pay more for the fixed length ones. But darn, the AF-S VR 105mm Nikkor is way above my budget. Well, see if I can cut cost elsewhere to make up for it or not. Most probably will go with the Tamron 90mm since it's about half the price.

 

[zac08]

9 cm?? Then it would make sense for people to pay more for the fixed length ones. But darn, the AF-S VR 105mm Nikkor is way above my budget. Well, see if I can cut cost elsewhere to make up for it or not. Most probably will go with the Tamron 90mm since it's about half the price.

When you're down to 1:1, you're probably shooting something pretty small... so I guess you'd want to close instead...

 

[Wilford Goh]

Nikon 105mm Macro VR :thumbsup:x10

 

[psychobiologist]

sigma 150mm ~

 

[GmbH.]

any adea how does the Nikon 105 VR Macro compares to the Voigtlander 125 Macro Apo Lanther SL?

tia

 

[Leong23]

any adea how does the Nikon 105 VR Macro compares to the Voigtlander 125 Macro Apo Lanther SL?

tia

I will go for V125 without doubt for the sharpness and the precise 1.5 turn focusing. But this lens is out of production, if you got a chance, go get it.

Or you not getting it but know where to get, please PM me (serious), because i'm looking for it.

 

[GmbH.]

I will go for V125 without doubt for the sharpness and the precise 1.5 turn focusing. But this lens is out of production, if you got a chance, go get it.

Or you not getting it but know where to get, please PM me (serious), because i'm looking for it.

thanks for your input.

so is this lens image quality really better than the 105 VR?
in terms of sharpness, bokeh, details, color...

 

[Leong23]

thanks for your input.

so is this lens image quality really better than the 105 VR?
in terms of sharpness, bokeh, details, color...

I personally felt that it is better than my nikon 200mm Macro (one of the guy i know is using it), that why i'm looking for it too, last week someone selling in buy/sell, but it is cannon mount....

 

[GmbH.]

I personally felt that it is better than my nikon 200mm Macro (one of the guy i know is using it), that why i'm looking for it too, last week someone selling in buy/sell, but it is cannon mount....

oh i was tempted by the VR as it can be helpful for macro.
but the images from the Voigtlander is truely stunning

 

[zac08]

oh i was tempted by the VR as it can be helpful for macro.
but the images from the Voigtlander is truely stunning

VR is not effective at close focusing distances...

 

[lsisaxon]

VR is not effective at close focusing distances...

But I'd have to concede that it's still very useful.

 

[GmbH.]

But I'd have to concede that it's still very useful.

useful shooting macro or normal use?

 

[lsisaxon]

useful shooting macro or normal use?

Macro... say, in the range of 1:2-1:4.

 

[GmbH.]

Macro... say, in the range of 1:2-1:4.

if 1:1 ?

 

[lsisaxon]

if 1:1 ?

It's better than handheld. Tripod still the best for 1:1. Otherwise use flash. ;p