Macro Lens Suggestions?

[j_s43]

Hello again,

I am looking to buy an affordable, yet quality macro lens for my new Nikon D80. From what I understand, a 1:1

macro is the best (and the closest). My other lenses are Tamron, but it seems that the Tamron macro lenses are

expensive. Any suggestions as to which macro lens I should buy? Are there less expensive ones that are still

good?

Thanks!

[keith_durnford]

If you dont mind manual focusing, which most of the time it is easier to do with macro anyway, then look out for

a used 55mm

2.8 or 3.5 ais micro, they can be bought reasonably cheaply nowadays.

[graham_thompson1]

Read up on macro photography ( I did).

There is plenty you can do without a macro lens. Extension tubes etc.

I bought a Nikon 105 2.8. Wasted on me! Money spent without ability

is money thrown away. Just google used macro lens or try ebay.

Lots of used older quality stuff about and I have found with macro it's

easier to use manual focus.

[joseph_wisniewski]

Your first guess was right on. The 90mm Tamron is excellent, it can hold its own against a Nikon. And it is not "expensive" by macro standards. If you're in the US, and you believe that Tamron will actually process their rebates, it's only $360 right now, which makes it about the cheapest thing out there. Even without the rebate, $450 is reasonable for a lens of that quality. The combination of price and quality makes it the one I'd go for.

 

A low cost alternative is to get a used manual focus Nikon macro. Manual focus is fine, you'll do that pretty much all the time in macro, even with AF lenses. But on the D80, old manual focus Nikkors have no metering, and that can be really annoying.

 

The recently discontinued 60mm f2.8 AF Nikon is about $400, if you can find some "new" old stock. The working distance (distance from the front of the lens to the subject) is about half what you get with the Tamron.

 

The Tokina 100mm f2.8 is also about $400, but doesn't have the reputation of the Tamron 90mm.

 

The Sigma 105mm is $440, and again is no match for the Tamron, although the extra 15mm might come in handy for some shots.

 

The next "zone" is $600-700...

[SCL]

If you do a search, you will find a lot of pros and cons for the various macro lenses which will fit your camera. They all are expensive, in that they are designed specifically to work differently than regular prosumer lenses. The Tamron 90 and Nikkor 105 are about the most popular.

[joseph_wisniewski]

I can't picture a better choice than the 90mm Tamron.

 

It's not expensive by 1:1 macro standards. If you're in the US, the current rebate gets it down to $360, which is cheaper than the Nikon 60mm, Tokina 100mm, and Sigma 105mm. I'd put the Tamron a step above the Tokina and Sigma in optical quality (sharpness, contrast, and bokeh). The working distance (distance from the front of the lens to the subject) is almost twice that of the 60mm Nikon, so it's much easier to light your subject, and you won't scare live subjects as much. Even without the rebate, it's worth looking at. Also look at used ones.

 

A cheaper way to go is to get a used manual focus Nikon 55mm or 105mm macro. Those are a bit of a pain on a D80. They only go to 1:2, you need an extension tube to get to 1:1. And they don't meter on a D80, so you'll be doing a lot of "guess the exposure, check the histogram, guess the exposure again". But the optical quality is excellent.

[JDMvW]

I use the Tamron 90mm Macro on another platform and it suits me very well. It's a bargain and optically very good.

 

However, manual focus is not much of a handicap in macro work since so often it's necessary to "touch up" the focus manually anyhow. Consider some of the older manual Micro-Nikkors. Some of them are very fine and are relatively inexpensive these days. Be sure to check for compatibility of the mount with your camera. I confess I can't keep straight what older lenses work with what in the digital Nikons, but I don't try to follow it very closely.

[acbeddoe]

The Nikon 60mm f/2.8 AF-D is an excellent lens; you can get it used at quite a low price.

[ianmaleny]

I will second and third the Tamron choice, It is really good, and excellent value.

<br>

Here are a few samples with the Tammy 90 on a Pentax K10.

<p>

<center><img src="http://reyno.com.au/Photos/5004s.jpg"></center>

[jimstrutz]

Vivitar, Phoenix and Cosina all sold the same 100mm f/3.5 macro, but I believe it is now out of production. Build quality felt poor, but has proven itself generally reliable over the years. Optically it was quite good for a $150 macro lens. It focuses down to 1:2, but comes with a dedicated adapter that brings that to 1:1. They come up fro sale on eBay from time to time, and should be priced under $100 for a used one in good condition.

 

Closeup tubes, and Nikon's 5T and 6T double element closeup diopters are other ways of getting reasonably good macro focusing with conventional lenses. And depending on what lenses you have now, a reversing ring that mounts one lens backwards on the end of another, is a simple way to get much more than 1:1.

[j_s43]

Thanks Everyone! I am going to look into purchasing a used 90mm Tamron if I can find one!

Jim, I have the Tamron 28-80mm lens and the Tamron 75-300mm lens, which says it has macro 1:3.7 option. Maybe I can use this for macro?? I'm not quite sure, and if so, how do I? My biggest interest (and challenge) is shooting up close (macro) with a shallow depth of field.

[JDMvW]

One of the advantages of the f/2.8 on the Tamron is that it does allow hand-holding at higher ISOs, but for serious work up at 1:1 you need to have the thing on a tripod or other support like a copy stand. One of the features of the lens that is really nice is a little switch to limit the AF in a macro mode. It saves on going way out and then back in. Of course, as I said, with such shallow depth of field on any macro lenses, you will find it necessary to insert human reason into the process of choosing exactly what you want in the sharpest focus.

 

I think you'll enjoy it.