Need Help Picking a Macro Lens for Nikon D60

<p>I am a newbie to macro photography. I have a Nikon D60 and have just decided to start trying macro photography. I want to photograph the basics...flowers, water droplets, insects, butterflies, etc.<br>

I was looking at the following lenses...anyone have recommendations on which one is are better?? I don't want to exceed $500 but less than that would be much better!!</p>

<p>1.) Nikon 60mm f/2.8 D AF MicroNikkor<br>

2.) Nikon 105mm f/2.8D AF Micro-Nikkor Lens<br>

3.) Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens<br>

What is the difference between the AF and the AF-S VR??? The price is considerably higher so I was wondering if it is worth the extra cash?</p>

<p>I really don't know much about this so please help! Also I have read that most people manually focus when doing macro...how do you manually focus without it being blurry??<br>

Thanks in advance!!!</p>

<p>An AF-S lens has the focus motor in the lens, an AF-D or AF lens uses the auto focus motor in the camera.<br>

<br /> The VR bit is Vibration Reduction, a fancy little piece of internal gear that reduces motion blur from camera shake, Given that most of the time you use a mono-pod or tripod when doing macro shots the VR is mostly useless for that,and you turn it off. When you are doing macro work back and forth motion will cause burring because any motion towards or away from the subject will move it out of the focal point of the lens, given that you are working with a depth of field of a couple of millimeters it does not take much motion to get the subject out of focus and VR does not help with that.<br /> I am not familiar enough with the 105mm Micro-Nikkors to know if either one of them has better optics for macro photography, based on reviews I have read I suspect that there is little difference in optical quality.<br>

<br /> In most cases you will end up using manual focus when doing Macro photography. And you can tell in the view finder whether or not you are in focus.<br>

<br /> One of the things you will probably need is a good ring flash or its equivalent for lighting. You usually set the macro lens to a small aperture (f22 or more) to get decent depth of field for your picture. This means you need a lot of light on the subject, and one way of doing that is to use a flash. To get even illumination a ring flash works fairly well. I use an SB-900 with a "Ray Flash" attachment as a ring flash and that seems to work well in a lot of cases.</p>

<p>This is an example of the Ray Flash lighting. The picture was taken with an AF 200 Micro-Nikkor manual focusing at 1/200 and f/40</p><div></div>

<p>Given that you use a DX camera, maybe a 60mm lens will fit you better because the cropping factor issue. A 105 lens will let you a narrower viewing angle, not so good for versatility, BUT...</p>

<p>The main difference is on the working distance; a 105mm lens will let you to work with a longer lens to subject distance. This is useful and definitive, in order to have enough room for illumination, to avoid disturbing to your subject, etc. I`d advice you then to buy then a 105mm version. There is also a 85DX Micro designed to use with DX cameras, a good compromise IMHO.</p>

<p>The VR feature is a great thing to shoot handheld, even for macro shots. Anyway, if your aim is to buy a specialized close-up lens, have a look at manual focus Micro-Nikkors. They are less versatile (no AF, no VR, no 1:1, no metering) but more convenient for macro-only kind of work (smoother manual focusing, good performance, smaller size&weight, possibility of using extension tubes, etc), and cheaper, I think.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>An AF-S lens has the focus motor in the lens, an AF-D or AF lens uses the auto focus motor in the camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is correct, but it should be noted that there is no focus motor in the D60, and therefore the D60 is incapable of autofocusing an AF or AF-D lens. It needs AF-S lenses to autofocus.</p>

<p>VR is largely a non-issue for macro work in my experience.</p>

<p>The least expensive ways to experiment with macro are to not buy a dedicated macro lens, and instead buy either a cheap diopter attachment (also called a "close-up lens", this is a secondary lens that screws into the filter mount on the front of another lens) or to buy extension tubes (which mount in between the camera and lens, and contain no optics). Either will work; the diopter is probably cheaper, but I find that extension tubes give better quality. A set of Kenko AF-S compatible extension tubes for Nikon cameras costs less than $200 from Amazon. (There are even less expensive sets of tubes from Opteka and Zeikos, though I have not tried them.) Extension tubes combined with a good-quality prime lens in the 50mm to 100mm range (even a cheap 50mm f/1.8) can provide excellent results.</p>

<p>While the diopter lenses & extension tubes ca be cheaper, they both lose the ability of the lens to focus to infinity, thus are not as versatile. You also have to add/subtract tubes/lenses in order to change the magnification ratio whereas with a macro lens you just turn the focus ring....My tubes & diopters just collect dust...</p>

<p>Option #3, I love mine. One of four macro lenses and my favorite...</p>

<p>I'd look at the Nikkor 85 for DX. 500 bucks. Perfect for a D60.</p>

<p>That said, I shoot all my static macro stuff with a 30-year old 55mm AI manual focus. No metering, no AF, no problem... It's a REALLY sharp and fun lens to shoot with and cost me just about 100 bucks.</p>

<p>I'd look at the Nikkor 85 for DX. 500 bucks. Perfect for a D60.</p>

<p>That said, I shoot all my static macro stuff with a 30-year old 55mm AI manual focus. No metering, no AF, no problem... It's a REALLY sharp and fun lens to shoot with and cost me just about 100 bucks.</p><div></div>

<p>I am no expert, so please keep that in mind. I can only relate my experiences over the past year with macro.<br>

I have both lens 1 and 3 on your list above and I like them both equally . Each serves a different purpose for me. <br>

99% of the time I use manual . I started with the 60mm and then added the 105 later as my macro interests grew and the 60 did not allow be to be up close and personal with some subjects.<br>

The 60mm I use mainly for water drops , water drop refraction shots and subjects that are not skiddish.<br>

The 105 is used for butterflies, bees, etc. I do not use VR when shooting macro with this lens.<br>

The depth of field with macro is small adding extension tubes makes it even smaller but increases your magnification. I use extension tubes on my macro lens to increase magnification. Please keep in mind as mentioned above that motion blur is an issue with macro when hand holding unless you are really steady with the camera. Extension tubes just compound this in my opinion.<br>

I personally would not start out with extension tubes. Yes, it is a cheaper option, but from my experience they take some time to get used to. <br>

You can use the 60mm or the 105mm for things other than macro .<br>

You can check my profile for examples with both these lens. The water drops and refractions are with the 60. Most of the butterflies are with the 105. <br>

Depending on what you shoot will usually determine if you will be using a tripod. I do not use one very often at all. The butterflies move around too much and my dew drop refractions I am literally laying on the ground. The water drops are done with a tripod. Most of the other insects I shoot don't stay around long enough for me to set up a tripod.<br>

As to your question about manual focus --- You have to pick your shutter speed, and aperture . You then rotate the focus ring on the front of the lens until your subject is in focus. Have you tried manual focus with your current lens?<br>

I hope this helps. Macro is a lot of fun and opens up a whole new world. Just be patient and keep shooting a lot !</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A longer working distance is helpful for macro photography, so I would prefer a 105 over the 60.<br>

The older 105 AF lens does not have VR which is useful for handholding. However it is much cheaper (used) and has one really cool advantage: the front element is recessed deep within the lens body giving you an excellent built-in hood.<br>

Being AF, not AF-S, it is screwdrive, which ordinarily means slow focusing. Macro lenses are normally slow focusing, but I have used mine for sports with a D90 and it is ok.<br>

I have the older 105 f2.8 micro AF. I love this lens. Until I got the 70-200 f2.8 VR2, it was my go-to lens for outdoor portraits and medium tele. I still use it in the studio and generally prefer it in the studio over the 70-200 f2.8 VR2 because it is smaller, easier to handle, doesn't pull my tripod head all over the place, and focuses closer. It is a very sharp lens. Mine has seen extensive use since I bought it in 1993 (including an ocean wave breaking over it) and it has been a dependable and useful tool with no issues. I highly recommend this tool. It's also very affordable, maybe $350 on the used market.</p>

<p>I'll second/third/fourth the idea of a dedicated macro lens. All of the lenses on your list also work really nice for portraits, so they can do nice double duty. Because of that, I would recommend getting one that can AF on your D60 (also because the D60 viewfinder is not ideal for manual focus work). That means AF-S lenses only.<br>

A bit revised list to chew on:<br>

1. Nikon AF-S 60mm f/2.8<br>

2. Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro<br>

3. Tamron 90mm f/2.8 (beware, you need the one indicated as 'BIM' normally)<br>

4. Nikon AF-S 85 f/3.5 VR<br>

5. Sigma 105mm f/2.8 HSM<br>

These should all be near or within your budget. Personally, I'd say if you want photos of living insects, you are better off with the lenses around 100mm, because of extra working distance.</p>

<p>Or you can use a close-up filter on something like the AF-S 55-200mm DX VR Nikkor lens. Probably under $225.00 used, and it will get you started.</p>

<p>The D60 works best with a AF-S lens.</p>

<p>Please check<br>

With a AF-S 70-300mm Nikkor</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/11432290<br /><br /><br>

<br />With a AF-S 55-200mm DX VR Nikkor, and a Pentax T-95 close-up filter</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/11214871</p>

<p>On a digital sensor -- you may not like using f22 on most of your photos.</p>

 

<p>Like Peter, I use older manual focus lenses on a D70s. No metering or AF (of course), I use either my Lester Dine ring/point light (which I got with my 105mm F2.8 Lester Dine macro lens) or at times I have even used a Nikon SB 600 fitted with a Sto Fen diffuser for added illumination (also allows me to hand hold & use a smaller aperture for greater DOF)...The older MF macro lenses are more robust than the newer lenses IMHO & are every bit as sharp. AF & VR are useless as you get closer to life size & unless you are going to use the lens for other photography, why spend the extra monies on a newer lens with features not useful for macro?</p><div></div>

<p>All these lenses will work. VR is quite useful if you plan on hand-holding, and remains useful for closeups in the 1:3 - 1:2 magnification range, IMHO. You will not have much of a butterfly or flower in the frame if you only shoot at 1:1. Obviously you can get better results with a tripod and flash, as with all photography, but it is a different process. I's second the suggestion of the 85mm VR microNikkor - you are the user it is designed for, and the quality is probably not much short of the FX microNikkors mentioned.<br /> Here's an example, handheld no flash, D300/105VR, using AF as I almost always do.</p>

<p> </p><div></div>