Best third party macro lens for nikon

[rpcrowe]

My comment is not coming from reading about the 90mm Tamron f/2.8; I own one and love it.

The lens produces image quality up there with my Canon"L" class lenses and from a Canon shooter, that is the ultimate praise regarding a lens.

The Tamron also produces a creamy bokeh that is extremely pleasing and it can be a very effective portrait lens (it is often nicknamed the "portrait macro"). However you do need a bit of space when shooting with a 1.6x camera (it is, after-all a 135mm equivalent on a Nikon 1.5x camera)..

If you would like to read about using the Tamron vs, Nikon glass, try this web site:

Tamron SP AF90mm f/2.8 Di Macro Lens - A Nikonians Product Review - Nikonians.org -- Worldwide Home of Nikon Photographers

[Mefistofeles]

That's a nice article... It really helps.

I'm wondering if VR is really that important and if the 105mm nikkor is really worth the price?

[RozSheffield]

Originally Posted by Mefistofeles

That's a nice article... It really helps.

I'm wondering if VR is really that important and if the 105mm nikkor is really worth the price?

Only you can answer the question about VR being important to you... Personally I think it's more valuable for macro rather than portrait work as you'll usually be shooting people in better lighting conditions. Do you find it difficult to hold your camera steady when out and about? Do you have a tripod? Do you have a remote shutter release? I have a tripod and wireless remote (£10 from Amazon) and find that this does a better job of getting a crisp macro image than VR - it's always better to eliminate a problem rather than correct it!!

Don't have any of the lenses you're comparing though so can't offer any opinions - I use a Sigma 70-300 for "close up" and my Nifty Fifty f/1.8 with a reversing ring for "true macro" stuff as I don't shoot it very often, however I may look at getting something with macro capability in the 90-105mm range in the future so will keep an eye on this thread :-)

[Mefistofeles]

I've read about macro accessories, such as reversing rings, extension tubes and some others... What's the main difference VS a proper macro lens ?

[RozSheffield]

Originally Posted by Mefistofeles

I've read about macro accessories, such as reversing rings, extension tubes and some others... What's the main difference VS a proper macro lens ?

Extension tubes screw on to your normal (non-macro) lens, but contain no optics themselves. All they do is move the lens further from the image plane - the farther away the lens is, the closer the focus and the greater the magnification. There will be much less light entering so you'll need to increase your exposure. Also if the tube doesn't have "contacts", you'll need to focus and expose manually, so if this is the case, using a lens with a manual aperture ring is a must.

A reversing ring screws onto the front of your normal (non-macro) lens and allows you to fix it to the camera backwards. You'll need to work entirely manually for this (a lens with an aperture ring is vital as you need to set this yourself), and you'll need to be very careful as the "inside" of the lens is exposed, so dust etc may enter. Because I don't shoot macro very often, this is the method I use with my Nifty Fifty (my RR was about £3 from Ebay) and I'm careful to keep the dust cap on my lens for as long as possible. If you want to see example images taken with this method, have a look on Flickr and search for "Reversing Ring"

If you haven't done much macro stuff before, they're both inexpensive ways of trying it out before investing in a dedicated lens which will give you much sharper results with a lot less effort!

[Mefistofeles]

Ok... so thaaaaaats a reversing ring... So I guess I'll have to consider that option, a reversing ring. What I don't like is the fact that, due to less light entering the sensor I'll need a slower shutter speed. Since I do a lot of macro shooting on the fly or in the field where a tripod is not an option. Still I'll give it a good thought.

So you spend just 3 pounds for your 50mm??????????? DAMN!!!

[vandergus]

I've really been jonesing for the Tamron 60mm f2 macro lately. It's a pretty new lens so it's hard to find any real reviews for it but the word of mouth has been pretty positive. It goes to 1:1 natively (no extension rings needed) and uses internal focusing so no crazy barrel extension at close distances. And it looks pretty decent as a portrait lens as well. 60mm is close to the sweet spot for portrait lenses on APS-C cameras and the large aperture should allow for some good available light shooting as well as good subject isolation. Sells for about $570 in the US.

The only drawback would be that it's not a full-frame design so it's limited to APS-C cameras.

[Mefistofeles]

Originally Posted by vandergus

I've really been jonesing for the Tamron 60mm f2 macro lately. It's a pretty new lens so it's hard to find any real reviews for it but the word of mouth has been pretty positive. It goes to 1:1 natively (no extension rings needed) and uses internal focusing so no crazy barrel extension at close distances. And it looks pretty decent as a portrait lens as well. 60mm is close to the sweet spot for portrait lenses on APS-C cameras and the large aperture should allow for some good available light shooting as well as good subject isolation. Sells for about $570 in the US.

The only drawback would be that it's not a full-frame design so it's limited to APS-C cameras.

I believe that 60mm is not good for macro or portrait, you have to get to close either case.

Have you seen the new Nikkor VR 85mm????... For $530 I believe its the best choice for both portrait and macro. The only drawback is that is for DX.... Maybe in the future I'll try to upgrade and I'll have to get another lens for FX anyway.

Right now THAT is the best choice.