What is the best Macro Lense for Nikon?

[wattashot]

Hey all, Im new to photography but Im finding more and more that I like to shoot macros. So Im looking for a macro lense, however Im not sure what the best one for me would be. I have a Nikon D5000, does anybody know of a lense that would work for me? Preferably on a bit of a budget, Im in college.....
Thanks.

[equilution]

If budget is an issue, maybe go for an older manual focus macro lens.
Like this one on eBay: Nikon AI 55/3.5 Micro for Manual Focus 35mm Film SLR - eBay (item 370270600468 end time Mar-04-10 11:21:05 PST)

All of the macro I've done has been manual focus anyway. However, if you want the best, go with either the 105 micro, or the 200 micro. They'll set you back between $900 and $1300. I have the 105 and love it!!

[wattashot]

Thanks for the link and the advice.... looks like im gonna have to spend some money on it because the one you sent me isnt compatable with my camera..... I do appreciate the effort and the advice. I'll prob. take your advice and get the 105. thanks again.

[equilution]

Originally Posted by wattashot

Thanks for the link and the advice.... looks like im gonna have to spend some money on it because the one you sent me isnt compatable with my camera..... I do appreciate the effort and the advice. I'll prob. take your advice and get the 105. thanks again.

That one on ebay was just an example of a manual focus one. There are many other manual focus Nikkors that will work. But if $900 is ok, then without a doubt, the 105 micro is the way to go. Either that or the 200mm. Both are spectacular, but the 200 will yield the same shot quality as the 105. The only benefit is that you can be further away from your subject when shooting. Here's a link to my macro gallery. All were shot with the 105 micro. Digital Photography School - Photography Forums - equilution's Album: Macro

Enjoy the lens!!

[wattashot]

Wow, yeah after looking at your pictures Im sold.... Ive got to get one of those lenses, guess I'll just have to save up.... thanks again.

[Qanths]

I have a Nikon D5000 too, and like macro photography too check out my blog Photography at Work :P anyway about your macro lens, there's one I've been craving and in my opinion is the best Nikon macro lens that's not $20,000, the 105mm micro that you've mentioned before, $900 expensive but worth every bit, the first macro lens in the world with VR vibration reduction, until now i've been using the 50mm f/1.8 AF nikkor $100 with a $40 reverse ring, the auto focus won't work on D5000s but at least its a sort of 2 in 1 lens for $140 (with reverse ring), i'd recommend if you don't have enough money know just go with the lens i mentioned and its reverse ring until you have enough for the 105mm nikkor, its not a bad option although it has two major downsides (I know from experience) the first is that the image quality is reduced to lets say 8mp since light won't reach the whole sensor just part of it. the second is that even if everyone tells you that you can manually focus you can't, i wish you could all you can do to focus with the 50mm reversed is go forward and backward until you get your subject into focus, this might seem like a "ok i'm definetly not getting that lens and reverse ring downside " but it's not really that bad, the image quality as in colors is still good, and keep in mind that its really cheap and its a great portrait photography lens too (manual focus works here of course its just in reversed that it doesnt). I personally have bought it as a transitional stage until i have enough saved for the 105mm VR

H.S.
Flickr: Qanths1's Photostream
Photography at Work

[OsmosisStudios]

I've been researching this exact issue myself.

Results indicate:
If you can afford it, the 200 f/4 is the best. It's expensive, only available used, big and heavy, but it's amazing.
If you can't, the 105 f/2.8 VR is a close second. It's a very very small difference between the 105 and the 60 (f/2.8 VR) and the 85 (f/3.5 VR DX). Most issues between the 105 and the 60 revolve around working distance and the issues between the 105 and the 85 is that one is FX and one is DX only.

If you don't plan on going FX, get the 85.
If you need the extra working distance (ie using natural light only, with touchy subjects), get the 105.
If you're doing studio work with strobes and stationary subjects, the 60 is fine.

All lenses listed here (apart form the 200/4) are AF-S as well, so they'll work flawlessly on ALL Nikon dSLRs.

[wattashot]

H.S.- Thanks for the input on an alternative, Im going to look into that for sure. The only thing that might draw me away from that is really money, I could use that $160 to go toward the 105mm and get the better option, just have to wait longer, and I do have time so I might just hold till I can get it.

Osmosis-
Forgive me for my ignorance.... but what is the difference between FX and DX lenses? Also when you say expensive for the 200 f/4 what kind of price range are you talking about, Im sure its well over 1k, but just curious what im looking at.

Thanks for the Input

[Rehesan]

Hi,

As you, I was looking for a, not so expensive way to make some macro photos, I was considering to get some extension tubes in order to use my nikkor 70-300mm lense as a macro one, but I ended up buying this sigma lense:

Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SLD DG Macro Lens with built in motor for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

For the price I think is a good deal. I got it just last wednesday and so far I tested it, just around my house, but let me tell you that so far I am very satisfied. The lens has the macro mode in the 200 and 300 mm focal length, it can focus from 1.5-.95 meters of the subject, it has auto-focus that is amazingly faster than my nikkor kit lens and produces a very crisp and clear images. The construction of the lense feels very solid and it has metal mount, not plastic.

The only con that I found for this lense, is the fact it feels heavier than my nikkor 70-300mm, but I think it´s because of the AF built in motor, that my nikkor lense does not have.

This is an example photo I made of my iPhone´s back, it was taken @300mm and I was about 1 meter away from the phone:



Maybe this sigma lense is not the "state of the art" macro lense, but for me is enough for now as an amateur photographer.

Hope the info is useful.

[wattashot]

I just checked that out and its an amazing lense at a good price, Im now torn between all of the advice Id just gotten, but its all very useful, for myself and anybody else who might happen upon it. thanks