What would a 105 mm 2.8 Macro lens add to these shots?

[Quicklabs]

These were taken with my 18-200 mm Nikkor zoom mounted onto my D80, handheld. I simply used the programmed Macro mode on the camera. I am thinking that I might get improved sharpness and detail and better depth of field if I bought the Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8, but HOW much better do you think would it be? I am showing the crop of the center of the flower so you get a sense of detail and DoF. Except for a little crop on the bee picture (and the center of the flower), these are right out of the camera. Thanks in advance.
(P.S.--I'll admit to being quite the novice photographer (I'm sure it shows) --just learning to pull it off of autofocus! LOL)

Exif data:
Shutter: 1/125
f/5.6
Focal length: 170mm
WB auto
ISO 250
No flash


Same as above, except ISO at 280.

[daft_biker]

Nice composition in the first.....bee is nicely placed and I like that you've included all of the flower it was on

At the same magnification you'll get the same DoF on the macro lens as you do now but with much better detail and sharpness etc. A macro lens will also allow you to shoot at higher magnifications so the subject appear bigger but as you increase magnification (go closer) you'll get less DoF for any given aperture.

[dpsteak]

There are things you can do to improve besides buying a new lens. Use a tripod and stop down to f8 or so. You will notice that your photos will be sharper. Good job too. I love the colors!

[davidmario]

Originally Posted by dpsteak

There are things you can do to improve besides buying a new lens. Use a tripod and stop down to f8 or so. You will notice that your photos will be sharper. Good job too. I love the colors!

When you when narrow your stops like that (switching from 5.6 to 8) aren't you going to lose that nice DoF? I was under the impression that for macr you want a really wide stop and get in close to the subject. (I am very very new to macro by the way...)

[Elmo]

No one can say a true prime macro lens will not be better than a closefocus general purpose zoom. The question is will you use it enough to justify the cost? There are some much cheaper alternatives that provide excellent results.

In the examples given I believe some other issues exist as the shots generally lack crispness.

As mentioned a tripod might help. Your shutter speed was much too long for the focal length used. Hand held macros require even higher than normal shutter speeds to reduce camera movement. For bugs and such I generally use flash to freeze the action.

Another issue is: Is it possible you were closer to subject than the minimum focus distance for your lens? I like to focus on manual and move the camera to get thing in focus. The down side a slight breeze and they are out of focus.

next use the smallest lens opening (Biggest number) to get DOF needed. AS one get closer the DOF for a specific gets smaller. So small that he DOF is down to small fractions of an inch.

[Quicklabs]

Very helpful answers and information. Thank you all. I will be looking at the Nikkor 105the Tamron 90 and the Sigma 105 mms.
Elmo, what do you think a more reasonable shutter would have been? Could I use the on-board flash, rather than a separate speedlight? Again, thanks.

[Elmo]

On board flash is generally a problem as it often cas a shadow from the longer lens extension at close range. You might want to try it to see what happens. If you do put a white handkerchief over the flash for a diffuser to soften the light.

I use a regular flash on a bracket with a 4 x 6 inch diffuser for most of my flash shots. The front of the diffuser is positioned right beside the lens and flosh with the front of the lens. It is aimed at the subject.

As for a shutter speed I try to use a shutter speed at least 3 times the normal recommendations for ss. The normal would be 1/focal length. i would try to get 1/)3 x Focal length) for hand held. That being said I seldom hand hold macros and if I do I try to use flash.

Most of what I shoot are shot from a tripod with a remote release..

hope this helps.

[Bman]

When you say better DoF, are you wanting deeper or shallower DoF. The 105 2.8 can give you much deeper DoF or it can drop the background out to a beautifully painted blur. It does exhibit a bit of purple fringe on brighter object sometimes, but that can be controlled to a manageable degree by controlling the contrast with a diffuser. I've also seen excellent results from the Sigma 150 macro. A tripod or developing a very good technique will help to reduce motion induced softness in any lens that you decide to get.