For macro photography
- Thread starter grahamc
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,520
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depends on your budget I guess pal.
I am currently looking into a macro lens and I have narrowed it down to the Sigma 105mm macro or the Tamron 90mm Macro lens. Both get great reviews, and there are a number of members on here who own one or the other.
The Tamron has a good reputation as a portrait lens too.
I have learnt that if you go for a shorter focal length than 90-100mm then the closer you will need to get to your subject. anything past the 90-100mm mark and your getting very closer and could be harder to work with.
Hope that helps a bit, I'm sure the more experienced members can help more than I can though.
Rob
I am currently looking into a macro lens and I have narrowed it down to the Sigma 105mm macro or the Tamron 90mm Macro lens. Both get great reviews, and there are a number of members on here who own one or the other.
The Tamron has a good reputation as a portrait lens too.
I have learnt that if you go for a shorter focal length than 90-100mm then the closer you will need to get to your subject. anything past the 90-100mm mark and your getting very closer and could be harder to work with.
Hope that helps a bit, I'm sure the more experienced members can help more than I can though.
Rob
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Budget is open right now... but will see what is suggested
I have been looking at the 50mm (f1.4) and 105mm...
- Messages
- 1,520
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
With the 50mm you will have to get alot closer than the 105mm, so you may find it a little more limiting. Sigma do a 70mm as well that might be worth a look.
I am slowly leaning toward the Tamron 90mm, becuaseI want to use it for portraits too, and its been rated as good for portraits.
I am slowly leaning toward the Tamron 90mm, becuaseI want to use it for portraits too, and its been rated as good for portraits.
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Very interesting, thanks... I am getting very tempted to rent some different lenses and spend a week testing them all
- Messages
- 369
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Depends on the camera. What camera do you have?
If it's Canon and you're really into macro then the MP-E 65mm would be my lens of choice, for more casual macro then probably the 100mm macro. Nikon, maybe the 105mm VR micro but I don't know Nikon kit that well.
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nikon D40X, but looking to upgrade in the next 6 months or so. Looking at something along the D2X lines, but still deciding.
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
its a very nice lens! definitely on the list!
stan the man
Nutkicker
- Messages
- 7,299
- Name
- mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i have a sigma 105 macro lens....very,very good indeed
took this shot with it last year....
took this shot with it last year....
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
i have a sigma 105 macro lens....very,very good indeed
took this shot with it last year....
WOW!! Nice shot!
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
follow up - looking to buy this lens now ad still deciding....
What is the Nikon equivalent to the MP-E65mm? I have seen some example pics from this lens, and they look awesome!!
Here are my options, as far as I see it:
Nikon 60mm f2.8 D AF Micro Nikkor Lens
Nikon 60mm f2.8 G AF-S ED Micro Lens
Nikon 105mm f2.8 G AF-S VR IF ED Micro Nikkor Lens
I have a Raynox diopter, but I am not a fan of having to be so close... 3.1cms.
Thoughts?
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
So I am selling my nikon kit because they are rubbish! What about from the generic lens manufacturers?
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Again unfortunately not - 1:1 is the best your going to get on a Nikon body unless you use bellows or extension tubes, you'd be better of getting a normal (1;1) macro lens to start with as the MP-E is probably not the best macro lens to start with, the siggy 105mm and 150mm are both excellent len's with the 105mm probably the best to start off with as its nice and light and easy to hand hold, and with a set of tubes you can go 2:1.
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
thanks
so the 60mm no good then? I am looking at pics of flowers, shells, etc, all static objects that are not going to try and run/fly away.
which tubes? are they lens dependant, or does the lens not make a difference?
- Messages
- 4,613
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
thanks
so the 60mm no good then? I am looking at pics of flowers, shells, etc, all static objects that are not going to try and run/fly away.
which tubes? are they lens dependant, or does the lens not make a difference?
Not 'no good' but with only @ 22mm working distanced you may have issues with lighting , As for tubes Kenko ones are a good option and will retain aperture control from the body, you will need the correct fitting for body.
OP
- Messages
- 2,300
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 23,200
- Name
- Richard
- Edit My Images
- No
Apart from cost, you will need a very good reason for NOT getting the Nikon 105mm VR. As good as it gets for your app.
And it's the only macro with VR (or IS) even if it doesn't work very well at close macro range (not really Nikon's fault - just the way things are with macro).
PS Don't forget the ring flash