Best Macro lens for Nikon D300 - please advise !!

Guys, thank you in advance for any help regarding this question. I am trying to determine what lens should I buy for

my D300. I know there is the Nikon 105 mm f/2.8 VR II but according to some reviews, is not as good as I thought

and also, I do not have the money to buy it. So, my options are, either :

> Tamron SP AF 90 mm f/2.8 DI SP

> Tokina 100 mm f/2.8 AT-X M100 AF-PRO D .... or

> Sigma 105 mm f/2.8 EX DG

Acording to what I reviewed so far, the call is between the Tamron and Tokina, being the Tokina the one with better

review cause the quality is better than the Tamron. Optically talking, both are the same I guess, but the Tokina got a

full recommendation. So, what is your opinion about those lenses? Which one should be the one that will be added

to my gear ? Please advise and again, thank you all for your opinion.

I'd take a hard look at the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G AF-S Micro Nikkor. I've just gotten trough testing it for a forthcoming review and I was pretty impressed.

Bjorn Rorslett hasdthis to say aboutthe new 60mm Micro-Nikkor:<P><I>The newest of the members in the long line of Micro-Nikkors also happens to be the best of them all in optical terms. Images are super sharp already from f/2.8 and keep their bite up to f/11, from which point a graceful decline kicks in. The f/22 result is very acceptable, but the f/32 isn't on the D3.</I><P> from <A HREF = http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_spec.html> Bjorn Rorslett's lens reviews.</A><P>

If you don't need autofocus I'd really start looking for the older 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor.

Everything I've read about digital macro photography say manual focus is the way to go. So, I would suggest a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 or f/3.5. You can find these on eBay for $100 or less. If you need longer reach, then the aforementioned Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4 can be had for well under $200. Or you can go deluxe and get the f/2.8 version for about $225-$250.

If you don't want to risk eBay, try Keh.com and check their equipment out.

the advantage of the 105mm f/4 AI-S Micro-Nikkor over other so called "Macro" lenses in th 100mm focal range including the f/2.8 105mm Micro-Nikkors is that it does not shorten focal length as you start working close to 1:1 ratio range.

Translation you stay with a good working distance.

If you don't have the money for the 105 VR then I imagine that the 60 AFS is out of the running. If you can manage with

the working distance of the 60, then the 55 Macro AIS is a great alternative, and it performs very nicely on the D300. I'm

also familiar with the 105 Macro AIS; given the limitations of its focal length, I believe that the 55 Macro AIS is a better lens for

close focusing.

Have you considered a compound diopter, or an extension tube?

I can't offer any information about the third-party alternatives other than that I've read and heard that they are, optically,

very good.

I have owned the following macro lenses - Nikkor 55mm 3.5, Nikkor 105mm, and Tamron 90mm. Also, I've fooled

around with reversing lenses and coupling two lenses together. If I was to own just one macro it would without a

doubt be the Tamron 90mm. The 90mm gets you a little further away from your subject thant the 55's and 60's. It's

much lighter than the 105mm. While it's plastic body and build seem to be fragile, I never had any mechanical

problems with mine and I beat it up pretty good. Most important, I liked the images it produced the best. The

sharpest of all of these lenses is a given, but the Tamron had the best color and contrast. Also, it made a good

portrait lens too.

This lens works well with DX format.

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7618521-md.jpg"></center>

60 2.8 AF D is one of my better Nikkor lenses. Considerably cheaper than the latest.

The 105 AF D is also a fine lens and you will have greater distance between the lens front and subject.

It depends on your definition of macro. If you want 1:1 then a true macro lens as those already suggested.

However, if you really mean just fairly close, say 1:4 then something like the 200mm f4 AI plus a 3T (or 4T)

close-up attachment will give very good results.

The image below is with the 75-150mm f3.5 Series E and 3T. This combination gave excellent results on my D70, and

from the little time spent on the D300, it is showing to be even more impressive.<div></div>

Sigma 150, Tamron sp90, Sigma 105. The 150 with extension rings or tc is the best for me.

- sergey

<i>but according to some reviews, is not as good as I thought</i>

<p>

My first impressions of the 105VR were that it didn't seem to have a good rendition of very small detail but it turned out

to be wrong when I did side-by-side testing. I got a Novoflex focusing rail to manage focusing. I've tested it against the

AF-D 60mm Micro and the new AF-S 60mm Micro, and the 105 VR came out better in both tests (range I used testing

was between 1:1 and 1:3). The 105 VR produced finer rendition of detail than the AF-S 60mm and far less CA-related

effects than the 60mm AF-D. However I only tested f/8 and f/11, as these are the apertures that interest me in close-up

shots (for DOF). The tests were carried out on a solid tripod with a focusing rail, using the D200 and D3 bodies. The 105

VR is also very practical as you can do some hand-held butterfly work with good results as long as you don't go wild in

your expectations on what the VR can do. -- My suspicion is that the 105 VR has such high contrast that the micro-detail

doesn't "jump" at the viewer in the way it does with some older macro lenses. It is there in the image though, and you

can bring it out with appropriate post-processing.

<p>

The older AF and AF-D 60mm and 105mm Micros are very difficult to manual focus accurately, therefore budget money

for a focusing rail. It will be mandatory if you want consistent results. The AF-S 60mm and 105mm Micros are much

better in this respect but still not as easy to focus as manual focus macro lenses. The focusing rail is the great equalizer

in this respect. The autofocus micros have the advantage that they go to 1:1 without the use of extension tubes,

although the price to pay is shorter working distance (manual focus micro-nikkors go to 1:2). The AF-S 60 and 105 have visibly superior

bokeh (more smooth rendition of out of focus areas) compared to the AF-D versions and produce images with more saturated colors and

high

contrast.

<p>

Anyway since you have budget concerns you might go with one of the manual focus micro-nikkors.

Mauricio,

The best macro lens for your D300 is the one that is going to serve you best for the type of macro subjects you wish to shoot. I had the Nikkor AF-D 105mm and AF-D 60mm lenses and found the AF not a required feature as I like to shoot very small subjects like pollen stamens and sun dew flowers. This really close up / higher magnified macro work requires precise focusing which can really only be delivered with manually focusing your lens to achieve your desired focal plane.

I sold both of the above lenses and purchased an excellent copy of a 2nd hand Kiron 105mm f/2.8 MF macro lens which suits me perfectly as it's dead easy to manually focus and I lose nothing when shooting with it in conjunction with my MF extention tubes. It cost me US $115 and suits me perfectly.

An older MF Nikkor lens as Ellis suggested might also suit you too, I used my Kiron macro on both D200 and D300 and had very good results and enjoyed the process greatly.

In my experience, added to what Ellis says, the 105/4 AiS is an outstanding performer on a D300. It shows no trace

of CA, it has been my sharpest lens for years, sharp from corner to corner. If you like to check a sample image, have

a look at this thread: <a href="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00PJry">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-

forum/00PJry</a>.<p>

Now my sharpest lens is the 105VR, by a small margin, but even wide open, and far more usable. Never used the

60/2.8 AFS, very interesting to

read from Ilkka that the new 60/2.8 AFS shows more CA effects than the 105VR. It confirms the 105VR on my

ranking. Just to add some color to the thread, let me to include some POW

contributions done with this lens (links to PN`s database, I hope not to do something wrong). As Ilkka says, bokeh is

great. It fastly becomes one of my favourite lenses on the D300. The cake is a fast dirty shot with direct flash, f32 or

f36

thought, with all that diffraction issues. Shoes with a natural low light level.<p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7349990-lg.jpg"<p>

<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00Q/00QAaq-57099584.jpg"><p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/7274613-lg.jpg"></p>

Maurico - I have always been very happy with the Nikon AF 105mm f/2.8 D Micro (non) VR. - Pat

http://www.photo.net/photo/5809065

Mauricio.... I'd vote for the 105mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor AF or AF-D if you have $500, and the manual focus Nikkor 105mm f/4 AI or AIS if your budget says $150-200.

105mm gives you a good working distance. The AF lens will go from infinity to 1:1 all on it's own. The 105mm AF lens is a great all-around lens, too. The manual focus 105mm AI/AIS lenses will go from infinity to 1:2 on their own, and need the PN-11 extension tube to get to 1:1.

"The image below is with the 75-150mm f3.5 Series E and 3T. This combination gave excellent results on my D70, and from the little time spent on the D300, it is showing to be even more impressive."

Andy,

I used that combination on film for about 25 years when I wanted to travel light and always felt that it gave very good results. Haven't tried it on a D-SLR yet but your image has certainly gotten my attention.

I had pretty much every Nikon Micro lens made (except the 70-180mm which I don't care much about)

they are all GREAT lenses..but if want the best IMO the new 60mm G, the 105mm VR and 85mm PC are the top three IMHO.

PS.

I'll put also the 200mm 4D in the "top" list... AWESOME lens.

If you want to focus seriously on closeups, i.e. magnification of 1:1 to 1:5 and working on a tripod, then the 105/4 would be my budget choice in this focal length range and the Zeiss 100/2 the money is no object choice. If you instead want something more of an universal lens that will go close and give good results when needed, then the 105/2.8 VR is a good choice, but I've also heard a lot good about the Tamron 90/2.8, which is getting something of a following. Haven't yet had a chance to try the Tamron myself though, plasticky build with excellent image quality is what a friend of mine commented.

If you want a universal, smallish lens to cover a wide number of subjects for moving around lightly the 75-150/3.5 with a diopter or slightly bigger, fancier and more expensive the 80-200/4 with a diopter are good choice. You lose AF though and they have some penalties in certain situations. Why Nikon doesn't make a modern version of these, I don't know.

"I had pretty much every Nikon Micro lens made (except the 70-180mm which I don't care much about) ..."

Juanjo that is an excellent lens though. The zoom range makes it very versatile and allows fast reactions when chasing fast objects or sitting ducks (spiders^^).<div></div>

I got the Nikon 105 mm f/2.8 VR II and i've try the new AF-S 60mm Micro on my D300 and i might say that both are awesome lenses but i rather work with 105 due to focal distance 1:1 the thin with theses lenses is that you may have to use at least f11 up so you can get a nice deep field

Regards

Luis Alejandro Rodriguez J.

www.serpientesdevenezuela.net

The 'micro' Nikkor lens you are looking to get depends on what you plan on using the lens for.

If you are into bugs, butterfly images, and flowers, you may need something more than the 100mm-type lens. The closer you get to a living insect, the better chances are that the bug will move away from you. The AF 200mm f4D Micro-Nikkor solves this issue some of the time.

Although not a 'micro' or 'macro' lens, the VR 70-300mm AF-S Nikkor does fairly well ... at least on butterflies.

And if you get a close-up lens (i.e., filter,) the lowly VR 55-200mm AF-S DX Nikkor can be used for some close-up work.<div></div>

Try the Tamron 90mm f2.8:

http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-AF-90mm-2-8-Di/dp/B00021EEA4/

Half the price of Nikon 105mm f2.8 (which is superb lens) but the quality is nearly identical.