- Messages
- 3,354
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am biased, but yes, it is still that good..........and I also use a D850!
As 'Johnnypanic' says, it depends on your requirements, but for wildlife/bif/motorsport/surfing etc., nothing else will do.
Liked your blog posting. What you really need is something along these lines:not used a 105 vr with it, but I regularly use my (non macro) 70-200f4 vr with Raynox attached and it's very good indeed.
see one of my earlier blogs here: https://imageweaver.blogspot.com/2019/03/insect-compound-eyes-and-supermacro.html
I have no doubt it would be great with a 105 vr
If it were to be used just for Macro then a D500 is a bit overkill imho. A D7500/2700/7100 would give very similar image quality, with a little more resolution. You could even go to the D3*** and D5*** with the same (or very similar) 24Mp sensor. If you don't need the other features that the different cameras give you could save a lot of money.Thank you both, how about as a dedicated Macro set-up with the FX 105mm Nikon macro lens?
Thats a bold statement.I am biased, but yes, it is still that good..........and I also use a D850!
As 'Johnnypanic' says, it depends on your requirements, but for wildlife/bif/motorsport/surfing etc., nothing else will do.
Some people could find the AF speed and AF coverage, higher fps and larger buffer more advantageous, but you pays your money.... etc.Id rather got a d7500 for 599 at e-infin and keep the change for glass
Some people could find the AF speed and AF coverage, higher fps and larger buffer more advantageous, but you pays your money.... etc.