Opinions Please

[sheltiesmama]

I want to be able to take better macro pictures and am looking into buying a macro lens. I can't afford the 105 that Nikon has. It's just too much out of my price range. I am looking at this one---

Nikon 85mm AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR f/3.5G ED VR Lens

and was wondering what everyone's opinion on it would be. The price on the site I'm looking at is $529.00. I use a Nikon D40 and I love it (don't want to start any wars here). Thanks in advance for any help and or ideas

[OsmosisStudios]

The 85 is, on paper, nearly perfect. Early testing has shown it to be as good or better than the 105.

[acedrew]

I would recommend checking out the Sigma 70mm and 100mm, a friend recently purchased the 100mm for his D90, and it's a great lens!

Andrew Rodgers
Perfected Perspectives -- Photography by Andrew Rodgers | Andrew Rodgers (acedrew) on Twitter | Login | Facebook

[Shokinen]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

The 85 is, on paper, nearly perfect. Early testing has shown it to be as good or better than the 105.

Is it out yet ? I was reading on macro lenses recently and tought the 85 DX was only going to be available in December.
Based on what you are saying, this could be a very interesting option.


sheltiesmama, the 85mm DX Micro is actually targetting the D40-D90 market.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by Shokinen

Is it out yet ? I was on macro lenses recently and tought the 85 DX was only going to be available in December.
Based on what you are saying, this could be a very interesting option.


sheltiesmama, the 85mm DX Micro is actually targetting the D40-D90 market.

It's not yet available to the public, but some very high-up photogs often get a pre-release view and test (under a strict NDA, naturally) and actually help to develop the lens.

[sheltiesmama]

Thanks to all of you for your answers. The 85 is available for pre orders at Wolf Camera with a price of $529.00. I still have not decided what I want to do.

[Shokinen]

I would wait a couple reviews if I were you.

Not that I take everything on the web for granted, but I like to read about what people as to say. Even Ken Rockwell hahaha. For me it's another opinion in the basket. Then I decide based on the type of photography I'm doing / budget if I'm debating.

[sheltiesmama]

I have made my decision. I am going to wait on this lens. I would hate to spend that much money and not have it be what I really wanted. Thanks to you all for taking time to answer my post.

[firebox40dash5]

I'll bump this instead of making a new thread...

I have a chance to order the 85mm VR Micro for an incredible price (under $450), but I'm still kind of up in the air on buying it vs. waiting and saving for a 105mm VR. The DX part doesn't bother me, I'm upgrading to a D90 in the next week, and I don't see a D700 or D3 anywhere in my near future, nor do I shoot film. I'm mostly wondering if the 2/3-stop smaller aperture is going to limit it's usefulness as a macro (shallow DOF) or portrait (large aperture for low light) lens?

It seems like a good compromise on paper, being smaller than the 105mm, half the weight, and about half the cost, but I don't want to get my hands on it and find it doesn't fit my needs. Though even at f/3.5, it's still faster than either of my other lenses (16-85mm VR & 70-300mm VR) at the same focal length.

I know no one seems to have gotten their hands on one for testing/reviewing yet, but does it sound like a good compromise in that respect?

[Shokinen]

Originally Posted by firebox40dash5

I'm mostly wondering if the 2/3-stop smaller aperture is going to limit it's usefulness as a macro (shallow DOF) or portrait (large aperture for low light) lens?

Look at it this way. When you are that close, f/2.8 is as thin as a rasor blade. Take this shot for example, aperture was f/11 and the body is not even in focus (taken with the 105mm):





Same thing for portrait. You want the eyes and the nose to be in focus therefore you cannot open to large.

I'm also seriously considereing this lens. I tend to get an eye more for portrait then wide-angle and sometime I would like to get closer to capture more details. DX doesn't bother me, if I ever upgrade my body it's going to be for something in the D300 category. At first, I was wandering if the f/3.5 would be a trade-off I couldn't live with only to realize most people don't open that much for macro.