Advice from those that know more than me
- This topic has 13 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated Jan 12, 2010 at 5:00 am by
.
-
Posts
-
What other lenses do you currently own? The 105 looks like a great lens and the length is great for insects (related to fly fishing). The 105 is not as practical as another lens with extension tubes though and if you are only shooting a minimal amount of macro stuff that might be the way to go.
Zach
Yeah, thats a tough one. if you are happy with the 18-200 then I would just keep the 105. I’m not a huge fan of Sigma, Tokina etc. but I am a little biased to the main brands Nikon/Canon.
Matt
Ask a question get a few:))))))
Are you looking for a set of lenses to cover a variety of situations and willing to accept some compromises to get that or looking for the “best” macro lens and the “best” wide angle zoom????
Are you going to focus on macro as your main imagery or are you looking to cover a bunch of bases.
If your going down the macro route – how far????? and what are taking pics of???
The 105 VR is a great lens
The Nikon 105 VR is a very good lens. The main problem I have with it is that VR is a useless function at macro distances. This feature adds expense to the lens, and only comes in handy you are using your macro to shoot portraits (which the 105 does quite well).
This is an even larger consideration on a budget. Personally, I use and definitely recommend the Tokina 100mm macro. At around $399 MSRP this should give you the best of all worlds: The working distance you want from a 100mm macro, and the funds to pick up a wide or some lighting accessories.
I don’t think the Tokina gives up any sharpness to the Nikon. Another option is to look for a used pre-VR Nikon. Optically they are excellent and usually sell for much less. The full mumbo jumbo on that lens is: Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D
One other option would be to look at the Tamron 90mm 2.8. You still get the distance but it’s a little less expensive.
Good Luck
Hey Matt, and congratulations on getting that great lens.
Personally, I feel that you should keep and use that lens, you can always pick up the less expensive 60mm later. That lens has great MTF data and is engineered to be one of the best lenses on the market!
It will work great for macro shots but serves as an EXCELLENT tool for shooting that, which I know, is even more important to you. As your child grows, you would be glad about the idea that you kept the 105, as you capture great detail and expression, in your child’s face, of closeups that you capture over the years.
Forget about what you may want to shoot tomorrow and think about the shots that are most important to you over the years. You will be more than glad that you held onto that lens.
More equipment and just diversifying your equipment is not always the best avenue. There are not many lenses that will deliver as good as that particular 105 and you will grow to appreciate it even more with prints and/or future monitor upgrades. As the saying goes, don’t cut off your nose to save your face.
The 105 is also an EXCELLENT macro lens but also serves an an excellent high end portrait lens!
Matt, everyone has offered great advice and I fully fully truly truly agree with Ben above. In fact, Ben mentored me through the whole macro lens setup in the beginning. I have both the 60mm (older version) and 105mm macro lenses amongst others. I make good money off the 105mm on the medical side but I find the 60mm much more enjoyable and practical; as explained below. Over the past year I have had the opportunity to compare these two lenses countless times and the final answer is that they are both great lenses.
Short answer: The 105mm is a fantastic sharp lens, great for macro and portrait (killer actually) but it is very limited on a Dx sensor camera body. The 60mm is a moderate-good sharp lens that is great for macro but also serves as a “normal” prime lens for a Dx body camera. If you have an Fx camera (i.e. D700 or greater), the 105mm is perfect (the new 85mm macro is probably even better – that is my next purchase).
Medium answer: The 105 requires more practical knowledge to operate, kind of like a fast action saltwater rod. The 60mm is more user friendly while still being an excellent lens in more situations, kind of like a top of line expensive 5-6 wt rod.
Longer answer: Speaking from experience it is my humble opinion that the 60mm macro lens is a better choice for amateur photographers with a Dx sensor. Why? 1) It is a great lens even if you upgrade to Fx in the future, thus no buyers remorse, 2) it is a fantastic fast-glass normal prime lens for both Dx and Fx, 3) it is shorter and lighter than the 105mm (which is a tank), thus you will actually put it on your camera body more often, 4) For macro shooting less than 12 inches to subject, the 60mm does a fine job and doesn’t get in your way, 5) you can shoot without a tripod most of the time because of it’s size. However, the 105mm has advantages of a near perfect focal length and compression and sharpness for portraits at the prosumer/professional level, it has VR (it needs it whereas the 60mm does o.k. without it because of weight). Also, after reviewing internet chatter on this topic over the past two years I have concluded that there is more buyers remorse with the 105mm for Dx users.
NIKON LISTENED! Matt, you aren’t the only one with this dilemma (60mm vs 105mm). That’s why Nikon came out with the 85mm f/3.5G macro lens last year http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/656971-USA/Nikon_2190_AF_S_DX_Micro_NIKKOR.html. It is no coincidence the the “85” is in between 60 and 105; also that is a fantastic portrait FL. It is too early to judge it’s performance (even Ken Rockwell hasn’t reviewed it yet). I will get one regardless because I am a macro junkie.
Final suggestion: it’s up to you. It is always fun having two lenses to play with like you mentioned. Hope my ramblings help you make a decision. Either way, they are both great lenses. Over the past year I have been grabbing my 60mm much more often for doing the fly art stuff.
P.S. Be very very careful about reading internet reviews on the 105mm lens. Most are done by people with no practical experience in macro photography, let alone proper training. This lens DOES auto focus properly and the rumors about skip-and-jump AF with drift are noticeable only if you improperly set exposure at less than 8 inches from the subject. In other words, if you manual focus at 1:1 like your supposed to this lens is flawless.
Two sample images from the older generation Nikon 60mm Macro.
Can’t really add more on the pro’s for the 105 that’s not said above, but shot with my friends Nikon 105 2.8 VR the other day and boy do i want that lens :).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.