Macro lenses and vibration reduction

White230

White230

Messages
76
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
No
Hi,

I've been looking at getting a macro for my D3100. After doing some research it seems the Tamron 90mm is a nice start point, however is doesn't have image stabilization and I was wondering how important this aid really is when doing macro photography.

I haven't a huge budget and the Nikon 105mm is way out of my budget. Are there any alternatives to the Tamron which have VR or equivalent?
 
The VR works well for close up shots, but it's a bit useless when you're at 1:1/true macro. In those cases you'll really want to be using a tripod, and/or a speedlight [preferably off-camera] both of these negate the need for VR and you're better to have it switched off.

I have to 105mm VR, and it is a great lens. Pro-build quality without being too heavy, it's nice and chunky, feels great to hold. I only ever use it hand held. It's got a beautiful focus ring that you can grab at any time, even in AF mode, and go straight into manual focusing [which is highly recommended for macro]

I owned a Nikon 60mm 2.8D micro in the past, and it was also a great little lens. It didn't have VR, but I never felt like it needed it as I would always mostly use flash for macro.

The VR is nice to have on the 105mm for situations where you have no flash on you, and want to do some close up [not macro] shots in dim lighting. But if it was bugs or anything that might move while you're shooting, VR is useless.

Look for a used 60mm 2.8D, they can be got cheap as chips now, extremely sharp lens, great for portraits on top too.
 
The Canon 100mm version is image stabilised (hybrid system with 4 stops quoted) but the benefit is barely noticeable at true macro distances/magnification. I'd say go with whatever suits your budget.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Off the top of my head, there are the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 VR, Sigma 105 and 150mm OS that have stabilisation.

At macro distances (approaching 1:1 or more), stabilisation is of marginal if any benefit.

The Tamron 90mm is a very good budget macro lens. I have one and have seen no reason to upgrade it as yet. The only macro lens that I would change it for is the Canon MP/E 65mm but that would mean changing systems.
 
Thanks for all your reply's. It seems that VR is obsolete when it comes to macro work.

Now I just need to decide on a lens, flash and make a diffuser!
 
I wouldn't say it's obsolete, no way. At 1:1 you will need faster speeds than say 1:4, but it will be much better than without. If subject is moving due to wind or otherwise that will be not great even with tripod, probably worse due to slower speed. AI-Servo does help to counter your own movements, so that and VR is a good combo.
 
I disagree about the IS on the Canon for macro , I have the Canon 100 IS and the IS does help at macro distances:)
but do agree that a tripod is better but sometimes the insects dont hang around long enough, thats when it comes in handy
and most people do use flash anyway so IS is not so important when used with flash
I prefer not to use flash tho and do mainly handhold camera:)

Canon claim 2 stops at 1:1 and 4 at normal distances

for the OP (white320) using a Nikon agree the Tamron 90mm would be the best choice:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top