200mm f4 Micro-- Still good for digital

[johnw63]

<p>I'm still looking for a bargain way to experiment with Macro photography. I don't have a DSLR, at this point, but I may get one within a year. ( I gotta see what prices do, when a D400 comes out ). I have read that the 200mm f/4 Micro AIS has some color fringing , when used at Macro focus ranges on DSLRs. If I am taking shots of flowers, bugs, and other natural things, rather than lens reviews with white letters on black lenses, or black letters on silver lenses, has this fringing become a real issue ? At a reproduction ratio of 1:2, it's not a true "Macro" I guess, but a good close-up lens.</p>

<p> </p>

[bjørn rørslett]

<p>The colour fringing is a real issue, but it can be (to some extent) cured in digital post-processing. My preference, however, is to use a lens with negligible or no CA - saves precious time in the workflow. Not everyone needs to think along the same lines and then the 200 mf Micro is OK.</p>

<p> </p>

[hans_janssen]

<p>Since the D300 is CA automaticaly removed in camera.</p>

[tony_correa1]

<p>Hello John - I use the Nikon 200 Micro on a D3 and find the quality fine. The CA issues are minimal to non-existant depending on the subject, background and lighting. On older digital slrs such as a D200 you wil typically find more CA needing postprocessing. Bjorn has a point about processing time. But unless you plan for a given outing with the lens on capturing hundres and editing all those hundreds, the post processing doesn't take that much time. <br>

Below are a couple of image samples with 100% crop. Both taken near wide open at f/5.6; one handheld at ISO 1600, the other tripod at ISO 200. These were processed in Capture NX2.<br>

<img src="http://tonycorrea.com/blog/wp-content/gallery/posts_misc/08-0218-098_micro200sample.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="798" /><br>

<img src="http://tonycorrea.com/blog/wp-content/gallery/posts_misc/08-0614-0048_micro200sample.jpg" alt="" width="791" height="1200" /></p>

[bjørn rørslett]

<p>CA removal is valid only for jpgs. For RAW, you need to use Nikon proprietary software.</p>

<p>Compared against other Nikkors, the 200 Micro MF is not in the top league. Still, it handles nicely, and has for a change a very decent tripod mount.</p>

[Jerry_]

<p>Your plan on going to a Ais lens for a yet-to-be on the market digital body - and to go bug chasing may be not so good. You will be using manual focus, if the camera will take a Ais lens (most of the newer Nikon digital bodies need AF-S lenses to work [i.e., the D40, the D60, the D3100] and bugs-butterflys may not co-operate.</p>

<p>Here are a couple of shots taken with the AF 200mm f4D Micro-Nikkor lens:</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/11153189<br /><br /></p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photo/11617451</p>

<p>Nikon has not released (if ever) a AF-S 200mm f4G Micro-Nikkor lens, which would be way up in price, for use by the owners of a large number of Nikon digital SLR owners.</p>

<p> </p>

[tony_correa1]

<p>From the OP's wording - "I gotta see what prices do, when a D400 comes out " - would indicate that he is looking at a body that the rumored D400 would replace. In other words he's probably looking at a D300/D300s, which will come down in price once a successor is announced.<br>

All Nikon dslrs will mount an AI-S lens. The lower end models (D40, D3100, D5000, etc) just won't meter with them. Nothing wrong with using manual exposure. Although the lower end model relatively small viewfinders would make manual focus more difficult, but not impossible.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>As a bargain macro lens, I am using an old 105mm f4 AIS that I picked up for just over $100 from KEH. I also bought extension tubes for $15 on eBay. Results are very, very good, especially for the money.</p>

[wogears]

<p>There's plenty of software that can remove 'CA'. The Lens Correction filter in PS, for example. Create a preset, and you can remove the fringes with one click. Same goes for PTLens, Debarrelizer, etc. The 105 AIS that Elliot mentions is a superb lens, and give you a very long working distance, because it does not focus internally. It is not a bargain solution, but one of the best lenses Nikon ever made.</p>

[johnw63]

<p>I am considering the 200 f4, or perhaps the 105 f4, purely due to budget. Yes, I might get a D7000, or a discounted D300s, if the price is right , and I have a monetary moment of weakness.</p>

<p>While the market us full of 55mm Micros of various speeds and ages, the working distance it rather short, and I have a 50mm F1.8 AIS for that focal length for general photo stuff.</p>

<p>While the new AF versions have a 1:1 reproduction ratio, that cost a lot more.</p>

<p>I considered getting an extension tube, like the PN-11, but they go for a good price too. It would make the 105mm f4, at $100 seem like the best deal. If I could find that deal. They are $160 - $199, at KEH, right now.</p>

<p> </p>

[walterh]

<p>If you are willing to go for the 90mm to 105mm range there are quite a few opportunities to find a low cost solution.<br>

One is the Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro lens. It is AF and rather cheap new.<br>

A good lens for a start in macro.</p>

[tony_correa1]

<p>Considering the lenses the OP was looking at, not sure he would consider $400 plus for a new lens 'rather cheap'. Used it's still about $100 more than the Nikkor 105 or 200 AI-S.<br>

But if the OP would like a lens to double as a 1:1 macro and short telephoto, a more recent used third party 90/100/105 lens from Tokina, Tamron, Sigma with 1:1 and AF might be worth the extra money while still saving some over the Nikkor AF Micros. </p>

[johnw63]

<p>Yeah, 400 bucks is not quite the range I was looking for.</p>

<p>Of the 90, 100, 105 options from the third party folks, what lens gets good marks ?</p>

<p> </p>

[tony_correa1]

<p>The various Tamron 90mm macro lens incarnations have always had very good reviews and user feedback since it's introduction 30 years ago. I think there have been 5 or 6 versions of the lens over the years, from original interchangeable mount Adaptall mount in the early 80's to the current Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di version. <br>

Tokina also makes a very good macro. Currently they offer an AF 100mm macro. I owned the 90mm f/2.5 macro from the late 80s/early 90s. Regret selling it. Wish I had kept it. Very hard to find used these days.</p>

[pictureted]

<p>I've been using the 200/4 macro (it goes to 1:1) on a D90 and been very happy. I use Nikon S/W and have not noticed any CA. The slow AF and lack of VR have not been an issue with macro work at all. A great lens.</p>

[walterh]

<p>200mm Micro Nikkor in good condition for much less than 400 US$ ? </p>

<p>Probably depends where you live. Here in Germany the 200mm micro Nikkor AIS is hard to find in good condition. So I have seen that people pay more than 400 US$ for a good sample or wait for 6+ month on ebay. The market was flooded several years ago.</p>

<p>I checked KEH and there are two offers, one for 275 US$ without tripod collar - something I would not recommend. The other one is 465 US$ but seems modified with chip contacts. Could be a good thing if done properly. Still in the price range of the Tamron 90mm new.</p>