Nikon Micro 60 or 105

[gej_jones]

I�m in the process of purchasing a �micro� lens. Since I have a D40x and for a lens to AF, I believe my choices

are one of the following AF-S Micro- NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED or AF-S VR Micro- NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED.

Would you please tell me what would be the advantage of one over the other. I would like to specifically take

closeup pictures of flowers and insects. Is one better than the other? If so, what makes it better for my choice of

subjects? If I should be looking at something different, please say so.

Thank you for any assistance.

Gej

[tpernal]

Hello George.

I read a bunch of articles and reviews before purchasing my Nikkor 105mm 2.8 micro.

I too, enjoy shooting bugs, flowers, whatever. One of the deciding factors for me was a comment that the 105

gives you some extra breathing room than the 60. Living subjects tend to get skittish when you're coming in for

the close up. I'm sure either lens is of very similar quality, but the 105 is built like a brick and takes some

great snaps. Since both have the same ratio of 1:1, you can fill the frame equally with either lens. A small

flower will span the entire image with either lens. Just my 2 cents... (Turtle, rosebud, and dog (from about 8 ft)

 

http://www.photo.net/photos/tpernal<div></div>

[nick_baker]

this is kind of obvious, but the 105 has VR. It may be the better choice if you intend to hand hold a lot, especially in less than perfect light. because stopping down is critical in macro photography. On the other hand, some people complain that the internal focussing of the 105, which changes the focal length, is a nuisance on a tripod because the precise framing changes with focussing. The other obvious difference is the focal length, which does not only affect the working distance. Both lenses are excellent at normal distances, so If your other lenses mean that 105 fills a gap in your range, or that the 60 would be your main choice for portraiture, you could allow focal length to make the decision. The 60 is significantly smaller, lighter, and faster focussing, as well as cheaper. It is said to be even better optically, although the 105VR is no slouch. As mentioned previously, the 105 does have greater working distance, but getting close to 1:1 means being within inches with either lens; with insects, I suspect that 75% of the time I could get the same magnification with the 60 that I get with the 105. I have the 105VR, because I think it is probably the best option available for hand-held macro photography. In fact I bought a Nikon because of it. In my opinion, this is what it is for, but if this is not your goal, then the other options become attractive also.

[inspiration point studio]

<P>I would get a used 105mm micro AIS manual lens or a 105mm AFD auto focus instead of a VR lens. If you are

shooting insects, you need a tripod. it is almost impossible to do it hand held and stay focus on an insect's

eyes. The VR feature helps you stabilize the image, but it won't help you stay focus. I have both the 60mm and

105mm versions, one AFD and one AF. I only use the 105mm version for flowers and insects. Check out my floral and

butterfly collection at <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/inspiration_point_studio/sets/72157604210122921/"

rel="nofollow"><b>flickr</b></a>, there are many samples of the 105mm lens. There are also examples of what a

Zeiss MF makro lens can do.</P>

 

 

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/inspiration_point_studio/2550094398/" title="Butterfly by Inspiration Point

Studio, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3001/2550094398_b76f14e20e.jpg" width="500"

height="400" alt="Butterfly" /></a>

[ilkka_nissila]

The AF-S Micros are far easier to focus manually than the AF or the AF-D, leading to better results if you're not using a focusing rail. Irrespective of whether you get the VR lens, you should be using a tripod whenever you can for close-ups.

[joseph_smith3]

I agree with Michael's advice. I own and use the Nikon 105 AF f2.8 macro lens. ( I would not buy or use the newer VR version because it cannot be used with ext tubes.) When I use it on my D 200 and D 300 I use it with a tripod and focus it manually. AF is not very practical for most macro work. For your D 40x, focus is achieved automatically only with AFS lenses. I believe your camera will meter with AF lenses, but you will have to focus them manually. Manual focus lenses will not meter on your camera. Given that a good macro lens costs a lot of money and will last you a lifetime, buy one that will satisfy you for a long time, especially if you upgrade your camera body to a D 200 or D 300 or a D 700 which all have a much better viewfinder for macro work. Read this link for good reviews of Nikon macro lenses: http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_spec.html

 

Joe smith

[nick_baker]

George

 

Some people will tell you that you cannot take macro photos of insects without a tripod and manual focussing. Perhaps they are correct that they cannot. Here are some examples shot using Nikon D300/105VR. This is my first digital camera, and these photos are my first attempts to shoot insects with it. I have many, many photos such as these, taken within a few days on a trip to a rainforest in southern China.

 

Nick

 

PS these are jpegs the whole frame, NOT crops, resized for the web but no pp yet. Autofocus in almost all cases.<div></div>

[nick_baker]

and another...

 

I really have many many many images like this. It is true that a tripod and flash would allow technically better results, but only in those places where a tripod could be set up and those instances when the insect stuck around. Handheld is the obvious purpose of the 105VR lens and it is strange that anyone thinks Nikon made this lens for a nonexistent purpose. Depends what you want to do, George.<div></div>

[inspiration point studio]

Excellent comments about the D40 and AFS lens compatibility requirement. I only use a D50 and F5.

 

Here's another sample of a 105mm AF on a D50 with tripod. To me, it's quite clear from the samples here that which images were taken with the aid of a tripod. However, I do want to point out that my samples were taken in a butterfly garden with hundreds of them flying around. It will be difficult to get the same level of closeless on the trail.

 

<a href=" title="Butterfly by Inspiration Point Studio, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2253/2521269153_a8bdcb5932.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Butterfly" /></a>

[alex_lofquist]

Both the 60 and 105 are internal focussing. At full 1:1 reproduction ratio they both become f/5.0. I see this as no disadvantage, however. I have both and use them for different applications. For insects, I like the 105mm with its increased working distance, but I use the 60mm for copy work. ( Even better, I like the 85mm PC tilt/shift for florals.)

[leonard_forte1]

I too have taken some sharp macros with a 24-85 f/2.8-4 lens handheld