# General > Member's Lounge > Photography >  Macro Lens for Nikon

## wasabi8888

Hi all

Just bought my first DSLR. bought the D80 with 18-200mm VR.

Intend to buy more lenses and flashes.

Can someone recommend the above for fish photography?

----------


## hwchoy

the Nikkor 105mm micro is good.

----------


## wasabi8888

hwchoy

Are you referring to the 105mm VR?

----------


## Simon

or else the tamron 90 will be an excellent choice, good lenses with a good price

----------


## Goondoo

> hwchoy
> 
> Are you referring to the 105mm VR?


you cant use the VR while shooting macro. So if you are not shooting portraits or such, the VR serve you no purpose. 
If you buying new lenses, you won't have much choice. There are no more non-VR 105mm in the market I think.

----------


## hwchoy

> hwchoy
> 
> Are you referring to the 105mm VR?




there is no point using VR at macro range because the biggest problem is lighting, and particularly for fish VR will not rescue you from a moving subject.

----------


## StanChung

I think the Tamron 90 is a good alternative that outperforms the Nikon 105VR from a few lens tests on the net. 
The only thing is it's plasticky and may not take a fall.

For studio-like purposes it does the job well with very sharp images.
What Billy says is true regarding VR. 
If you're taking a stroll on the street market or in a jungle with lots of interesting close ups to be had, it will serve you well but otherwise it has to be turned off when camera is mounted on a tripod.

Oh forgot to welcome to the DSLR, Nikon club!!! AQ is pro Canon I believe. lol. [j/k]

----------


## hwchoy

you can get a second hand non-VR 105mm micro.
you probably want a separate walkabout zoom for street photography purpose. 105mm prime is rather long for most purposes.

----------


## benny

AQ is not pro Nikon Canon. We have loads of Nikon users here too. I for one, would love to have a Nikon D2Xs and D2Hs with 105 VR macro and the twin macro flash amongst other things. But.....resources are limited...

However, I will agree that the Canon users in AQ are more friendly and more willing to share their photographic resources. No trouble to try before you buy, which is the best way to ascertain your choices.

Cheers,

----------


## hwchoy

most important is to use the same gear as benny  :Grin:

----------


## StanChung

LOL... Benny, if i can I will also get Canon 5D or MKII. lol. Your logic I also can use. kekeke.

Agree with Choy to buy same as Benny since he very generous with lending of his gear. kekeke.




> AQ is not pro Nikon.


 I agree!!!  :Laughing:

----------


## valice

I will just settle for 30D. Hee... *Hide from Benny's stare*
Anyone wants a 2nd 350D? Hahaha...

Congrats on your buy again Jeff. If you are short on budget, go with the Tamron 90mm ask for Nikon mount. No joke. That is one hell of a gem. If it is not for the non-IF, I would have kept it. There is also the Tokina. Heavy like siao.

Pop by John or MS or Cathay and ask to try the lens and see which you like better. Then go home and think then make the decision. Although that can be difficult. =)

----------


## Simon

go to MS, look for florence and tell her Simon recommended you. If she can't remember just tell her into butterfly & aquatic plants, if that doesn't jog her memory, just add got into a car accident photographying butterflies, that she will remember  :Grin:

----------


## StanChung

Here's what photodo says for the AF-SP version [what I'm using]
http://www.photodo.com/product_503_p2.html
http://www.photodo.com/product_503_p4.html

----------


## wasabi8888

> I think the Tamron 90 is a good alternative that outperforms the Nikon 105VR from a few lens tests on the net. 
> The only thing is it's plasticky and may not take a fall.
> 
> For studio-like purposes it does the job well with very sharp images.
> What Billy says is true regarding VR. 
> If you're taking a stroll on the street market or in a jungle with lots of interesting close ups to be had, it will serve you well but otherwise it has to be turned off when camera is mounted on a tripod.
> 
> Oh forgot to welcome to the DSLR, Nikon club!!! AQ is pro Canon I believe. lol. [j/k]


Stan

OK.. will consider Tamron... thought i wanted to stick to Nikon all the way...




> there is no point using VR at macro range because the biggest problem is lighting, and particularly for fish VR will not rescue you from a moving subject.


hwchoy... this is new to me... as you may have already guessed, i am new and dumb to photograpy..... going for class this Sunday.... Stanley photocentre or something... I know lighting is a big deal in fish photography... any suggestions for a good flash to use?




> I will just settle for 30D. Hee... *Hide from Benny's stare*
> Anyone wants a 2nd 350D? Hahaha...
> 
> Congrats on your buy again Jeff. If you are short on budget, go with the Tamron 90mm ask for Nikon mount. No joke. That is one hell of a gem. If it is not for the non-IF, I would have kept it. There is also the Tokina. Heavy like siao.
> 
> Pop by John or MS or Cathay and ask to try the lens and see which you like better. Then go home and think then make the decision. Although that can be difficult. =)


Vincent, if not short of budget, what lenses would you recommend? What is "non-IF"??? dun like that leh.. i new to this... dont use acronyms leh....

so net net.... none of you would recommend 105mm VR as a macro lens... most of you are recommending a Tamron 90mm...

1. If I have to make a choice between buying a macro lens and a flash... which one should i go for? I am using a 18-200mm VR now...that's the only Nikkor lens that I have...

2. I really like close ups.. I see a lot of close up pics like fish eyes, spiders etc.. what kind of lenses in the Nikon range that will produce those pics?

----------


## hwchoy

either the SB600 or SB800 depending on what you can afford. flash is of course bigger the better, you never know when you need the extra reach.

fish photography can only learn from Benny's tuition centre  :Grin:

----------


## wasabi8888

Come to think about it.... there is something I do not understand...

I quote this from Nikon

"The incorporation of Nikon VR technology in a Micro-Nikkor lens expands versatility by, for the first time, providing the sharpness benefits of VR and improving hand-held close-up photography"

Since VR helps handshake, wont this be good for fish photography?
I understand that if a tripod is used, then VR is rendered useless.. but I thought fish photography need not use tripod... and with VR capabilities.. even more dont have to use tripod rite?

----------


## hwchoy

> Come to think about it.... there is something I do not understand...
> 
> I quote this from Nikon
> 
> "The incorporation of Nikon VR technology in a Micro-Nikkor lens expands versatility by, for the first time, providing the sharpness benefits of VR and improving hand-held close-up photography"
> 
> Since VR helps handshake, wont this be good for fish photography?
> I understand that if a tripod is used, then VR is rendered useless.. but I thought fish photography need not use tripod... and with VR capabilities.. even more dont have to use tripod rite?




particularly for fish macro photography (remember to tell people how small the fish you are trying to photograph, else they will laugh and tell you to use a tripod) you need to light the subject, and when you do that there is no need for VR as you will be shooting at x-sync speed which is probably 1/200 or 1/250s.

----------


## valice

> go to MS, look for florence and tell her Simon recommended you. If she can't remember just tell her into butterfly & aquatic plants, if that doesn't jog her memory, just add got into a car accident photographying butterflies, that she will remember


she confirm will remember you. When I go there last time, she still asks about you.




> Vincent, if not short of budget, what lenses would you recommend? What is "non-IF"??? dun like that leh.. i new to this... dont use acronyms leh....


IF stands for Internal Focusing. Meaning that the lens doesn't extend when it change focusing. A Tamron 90mm will extend when you turn the focusing ring, while a Canon 100mm or 60mm doesn't. I am not sure whether a Nikkor 105mm does or not.




> Come to think about it.... there is something I do not understand...
> 
> I quote this from Nikon
> 
> "The incorporation of Nikon VR technology in a Micro-Nikkor lens expands versatility by, for the first time, providing the sharpness benefits of VR and improving hand-held close-up photography"
> 
> Since VR helps handshake, wont this be good for fish photography?
> I understand that if a tripod is used, then VR is rendered useless.. but I thought fish photography need not use tripod... and with VR capabilities.. even more dont have to use tripod rite?


That is assuming that light is not an issue for you. VR gives you an advantage of about 3-stops, you can hand-hold the lens at a lower shutter speed without fear of blurness due to hand-shake. However, lower shutter speed doesn't freeze the subject. And when we shoot fish, we want the fastest shutter speed possible, so at say 1/200sec shutter speed, hand-shake blurness is not an issue. So VR is useless.

Hope I cleared abit of your doubt.

----------


## wasabi8888

ahhhhh!!!!!!!! cant wait to go class this Sunday....

I just read something about close-up filters.. what about Nikon 50mm f/1.4 with close up filter?

----------


## Simon

perhaps, you should consider getting a 105mm without the VR

----------


## valice

The class wouldn't teach you all these things. They will only teach you about generic photography. Theory on shutter speed, aperture, exposure, composition.

I believe you are going for the Basic Photography Course by SLCC right?
Also, it wouldn't be equipment specific.

FOrget about the close-up filter now. Just use your 18-200.
Difference between dedicated macro and a zoom lens, is the 1:1 magnification. But to get 1:1, your depth-of-field (DOF, you will learn more during the course) is scarily thin, so your fish must be absolutely parallel to the glass for the whole fish to be in focused.

So for me, most of the time, I don't shoot 1:1. Means, I can actually survived without a macro lens, but shoot with my kit lens.

Another thing about macro lens, is that it is sharper as with all prime lens.

Not sure what the SU-800 is, but the good thing about Nikon system over the Canon is the built-in commander mode. Save 250 bucks.

----------


## wasabi8888

> The class wouldn't teach you all these things. They will only teach you about generic photography. Theory on shutter speed, aperture, exposure, composition.
> 
> I believe you are going for the Basic Photography Course by SLCC right?
> Also, it wouldn't be equipment specific.
> 
> FOrget about the close-up filter now. Just use your 18-200.
> Difference between dedicated macro and a zoom lens, is the 1:1 magnification. But to get 1:1, your depth-of-field (DOF, you will learn more during the course) is scarily thin, so your fish must be absolutely parallel to the glass for the whole fish to be in focused.
> 
> So for me, most of the time, I don't shoot 1:1. Means, I can actually survived without a macro lens, but shoot with my kit lens.
> ...



Vincent

So i need just to buy the flash? the SB800? anything else? dun tell me tripod hoh....

----------


## valice

You can say that. Nothing else for now if you only want to do fish photography.

Photoshop? For you to add nice nice borders and watermarks?  :Grin:

----------


## wasabi8888

VIncent

OK.. i understand...

But if I want to take pictures of insects' eyes, water droplets etc.. how will that change my specs?

Sorry for so many questions....

if i insist on using the 105VR, i can still attach close up filters rite?

----------


## valice

You can use the cheaper alternative of extension tubes instead.

----------


## hwchoy

use extension tube as close-up filters degrades the image, and shortens your working distance so much you'd be hard pressed to focus properly.

----------


## Simon

use a closeup filter like the canon 250D instead of a extension tube

----------


## hwchoy

I've tried the 250D on my 100mm macro, not good leh.

----------


## Simon

really? I used the 500D on my previous 70-300 sigma and it was extremely good, I printed a few photos at S8R and its still sharp

----------


## hwchoy

but 70-300 is only 2:1 macro. what's its working distance? the 100mm already only 6 inches from the front of the barrel, when I added a 250D (which is a +4 diopter, 500D is +2) the DOF is sooooo shallow and working distance so little its very impractical.

to be fair any pix will look fine when printed unless you are blowing to A1 or A0. to see any distortion I think you need to pixel peep. I can't tell the difference between the 250D and a Hoya +4 for that matter.

----------


## Simon

should be 90cm I think. It's quite obvious for the shallow DOF, the closer you are, the thiner the DOF is. 

I can print part of the photo in A1/A0 for you to see. And yes, there is a world of a difference when you compare with a Hoya closeup filter. I used to have a +4 Hoya and the quality was really bad.

----------


## hwchoy

is it? I cannot tell the difference, but then it was on the G5.

I'm sure the 250D works fine with lenses, its just I find it very hard to use because its so little working distance.

----------


## Goondoo

> should be 90cm I think. It's quite obvious for the shallow DOF, the closer you are, the thiner the DOF is. 
> 
> I can print part of the photo in A1/A0 for you to see. *And yes, there is a world of a difference when you compare with a Hoya closeup filter.* I used to have a +4 Hoya and the quality was really bad.


Yea, the price too! but its really the best option you can get.

----------


## Green Baron

I have been using the Nikon 105 VR and non VR for a few days and I would definitely recommned the 105 VR. I find the 105 VR lens to be much brighter and the colour and bokeh is much better.

Btw, both the Nikon 105 Micros are IF.

----------


## hwchoy

ah better bokeh is defintely a good reason to pick the lens.

----------


## wasabi8888

wa... did not understand the last few posts... 

so it's 105mm VR and extension tubes or close up filters? not that i know what is an extension tube

----------


## StanChung

Lol. With a macro/micro lens you would not need an extension tube unless you want to photograph even smaller fauna than a Celestial Pearl Danio[CPD].

I find shutter speed at 1/200 without flash will not freeze zippy subjects like rummy noses or CPD's.

Flash and a tripod is essential for fast moving subject macro photography because you need high DOF[depth of field-front to back sharpness] and high shutter speed. Only with flash that has around 1/10000 sec burst of light can freeze motion for something small and zippy. With a powerful flash, you can set your aperture smaller F22/32 to get more DOF.

The tripod is essential because you will get a *major headache* trying to hold the camera and look thru it for such a close up subject. Focussing will also be a nightmare. Get a good one. I bought a Gitzo mountaineer [no idea why as I'm not mountain goat. lol] it's light and sturdy. There are other good brands that are value for your money.

I would have bought the Nikon AF-D105 micro too if the specs were a little better. A bit disappointed that Nikon did not spice up the 105VR more to make it a must have. If certain apertures had better performance the lens would be the one to have. That said the 105VR lens is no slouch.

There's a whole load to read here http://www.aquaticquotient.com/forum...splay.php?f=16

Start programming your head with all these acronyms.  :Laughing:

----------


## valice

> The tripod is essential because you will get a *major headache* trying to hold the camera and look thru it for such a close up subject. Focussing will also be a nightmare. Get a good one. I bought a Gitzo mountaineer [no idea why as I'm not mountain goat. lol] it's light and sturdy. There are other good brands that are value for your money.


But it will be more of a headache if you use a tripod to shoot fish. Stan, you shooting fish using a tripod?

----------


## wasabi8888

Stan

That link does not go to a particular thread.. can you direct me to the rite thread?

Does the SB800 serve the purpose of getting a smaller aperture?
And it seems that i need a tripod as well.... i saw a good ball head the other day... The brand is Markins.. any comments?

Also, i see that you are using a 50mm prime lens.. i heard that is a must have... and that can be converted to a macro lens as well.. any comments?

I need to go shopping with someone that knows all this man... anyone wants to volunteer? food on me....

----------


## StanChung

Hi Wasabi,

Read the stickies! The shortforms and the links to the photography sites. [Some don't work, so you can report to Benny  :Grin:  ]

Get a tripod that uses a ball-head with pressure/tightening adjustment knob. 
Tip: if you see your reflection in the aquarium, the ambient light is too bright. Wear black, darken room/shut curtains, wait till night time.

Hi Vincent,
I use a tripod to shoot fish. Frame up roughly the bg I want, wait for the superstar/s to make an appearance by tempting with food or hand gestures.  :Grin:  

The tripod ball-head set to a semi-loose position will give flexibility without the headache. I also use manual focussing because auto is quite kooky/annoying unless you set the focus point at exactly where the fish eye is going to be in frame. Try AF on small fishes  :Knockout:  

Since Choy and Benny already got so many nice pics of small fishes, I'll stick to slow moving big targets like discus. lol. I'll only do small fishes for money.  :Evil:  

The reflection problem for close ups can be avoided easily by just angling away from aquarium glass. Don't like direct flash even if it's softened. Bounced light can work but you lose a lot of F-stops.

----------


## valice

Hehheh, Stan, I do AF on small fishes when I am lazy.  :Grin:  That's where the 60mm EFS come in. Extremely fast and accurate. Hand-held.  :Razz:  


Jeff,
buy what you need. Not what others say. Else you will drop into that BBB hole and buy things that you find yourself keeping in the dry cabinet. Just to let you know about the dangers of SLR photography first. keep your focus!

But, yes, 50mm can be used for fish photography. But like I say, and I say again, all lenses can be used for fish photography once you solve the problem of light.

Another limitation about lens focal lengths you need to remember is the combination of your physical working area (meaning space around you) and size of fish. Too long a lens on a big fish with no space to work, you can't shoot the whole fish. Too small a fish with too short a lens, you go super close to the glass and the subject still small in your picture.

So for the case of Stan shooting his discus, the 50mm will work nice for him. A 105mm might be too long if he has a short physical working space in front of the tank.

----------


## Simon

you don't require a tripod, it slows your response. handheld is easier is track the movement or you simple rest your elbow on the table and aim at 1 area while the unexpecting fish swims pass. however, a tripod like the gitzo mountaineer will be an excellent choice for insect macro. if you need demo, approach benny, he will demo how to handhold his 180mm L, which is far heavier than all of the other brands

----------


## hwchoy

I'm not sure Stan shoots any of the small fishes, meaning 2cm and below. They are not only small, many also swim in a jerky motion. your field of view is so small that tracking the subject is a problem because they easily swim out of your focusing view.

Actually how can you shoot 1/200s without flash?

also at ƒ/11 and beyond, you start to get diffraction softness. For big fish this is not an issue, for small fish with very delicate features, this is clearly a problem. In this regards, fish is simple, try shooting 3D objects like mini orchid flowers.

----------


## StanChung

> I'm not sure Stan shoots any of the small fishes


Tried rummies but lousy quality without flash. I got 450W of lighting mah. ASA 400 and f/5.6 only. A bit of brightening in photoshop with NEF RAW mode.
Not your standard lah.  :Embarassed:  Direct flash and ugly. paiseh. Can use cable but the tank is 5ft and i don't want flash to drop in the tank[done that before]!  :Knockout:  Actually a cheap tripod is useful to mount the flash to get the lighting you want to avoid accident. I have this nissin remote flash trigger thing to avoid cables if i need additional lighting without buying expensive flash units.

A table is like a tripod. I use my tripod to get the framing, loosen the ball head. I also have to stay very far away because of my ugly face or the 'superstar' will not appear.  :Laughing:  So far my subject[discus] very easy and only need 1/60 with 72W pl. Used and 80-200AF-D. Was sitting 8ft away.

Anyway let me do a 'Stan's gallery collection' of more than 5 pics first then can let you guys comment. So far have to concentrate on whole tank subjects. The 5ft tank with light colour bg is quite a challenge for the you know what competition...geez.

----------


## hwchoy

actually the reason I said that is to highlight the different techniques and equipment needs, and all this is primarily driven by the size of the fish, and the size of the tank.

I once shot vinz' 15-inch arowana, one overhead flash was simply not enough (it creates a light cone), but to my surprise, it works without flash because I could open my aperture wide (but this is on a G5 digicam) and yet have enough DOF because of the shooting distance.

I also shot 6-8 inch cichlids in CF's display tank with flash. the things you have to deal with vs 2cm fishes are very different.

Hence the thing to remember, there is not one single formula and camera settings. you need to understand what you are doing, why the pictures are turning out the way it does, and most importantly understand how your fish behave in order to get the picture you want.

----------


## valice

Brilliant summary on fish photography!  :Well done:

----------


## StanChung

Couldn't have said it better. Get the gear to suit the subject you want to photograph. Good to have gear that have overlapping capabilities but there'll be quality compromises. eg: an 28-200 zoom would have quality issues but you'll still get a photo, just not a great one like the sifu's here.

Expand as you encounter more desires...[hehe]

----------


## wasabi8888

Still searching for a good macro lens.. tried the Tamron 90, Nikkor 60mm, 105mm VR... have not decided yet.. but i guess the flash takes priority.. but cant buy now... must wait for next pay day, cant imagine my bills next month..... :Crying:  

My friend bought the Hoya +3 and +5 filter... I guess I will try it out first before buying the macro lens.. but i guess my tendency is 105mm VR with close up filters.... am I nuts?

----------


## Green Baron

> Still searching for a good macro lens.. tried the Tamron 90, Nikkor 60mm, 105mm VR... have not decided yet.. but i guess the flash takes priority.. but cant buy now... must wait for next pay day, cant imagine my bills next month..... 
> 
> My friend bought the Hoya +3 and +5 filter... I guess I will try it out first before buying the macro lens.. but i guess my tendency is 105mm VR with close up filters.... am I nuts?


You decision will have to be based on your budget and you expection on the quality of macro shots.

I have owned and used all of them - Hoya filter, Tamron 90, Sigma 105, Canon 100, Nikon 105 VR and non VR.

My recomendation is 1. Nikon VR, 2. Tamron, 3. Nikon/Canon close up filter. 
I don't recommend the hoya filter.

----------


## wasabi8888

Green Baron

Thanks for the tip... will consider about the VR.. I will go test again..

----------


## StanChung

If budget is the problem, Tamron SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Macro 1:1 Di is more value for money and performs better at all the way from f2.8 up to f16.[edge performance especially] After that, performance is the same according to lens test comparisons on the net.

For macro/micro, you're looking at f8 upwards perfomance, so the choice is yours.

IMHO, if you want the Nikon VR for 4 stops less handheld blur then go for it but you can buy two Tamrons for the price of one Nikon VR and get some change to buy skylight UV filters.  :Smile:

----------


## tjudy

I have been using a Nikon D80 for a few months now, and I am very happy with it. I alos decided to purchase the Tamron 90mm lens over the Nikkor 105mm, and I am glad that I did. I have had the opportunity to use both, and like ease of the Tamron better. The manual focus on the Tamron is very easy to control, plus you can manually focus the lens while the camera is on AF. Switch between the two is as fast as clicking the focus ring backward or forward on the lens.

My next lens purchase will be a smaller micro... probably a Nikkor 60mm lens. The 90mm lens, though great for shooting decent size fish from .5 meter from the tank, is too large to really get close to a very small fish. I need a lens that will let me fill the frame with a _Bororas merah_!. I am not sure if Tamron sells something similar, though whent he time comes to buy I will look into it.

----------


## benny

> I need a lens that will let me fill the frame with a _Bororas merah_!. I am not sure if Tamron sells something similar, though whent he time comes to buy I will look into it.


Hi Ted,

Welcome to AQ!!

I think the Tamron has a 180 mm macro that will suit the above requirement pretty well. Add some extension tubes, the filling the frame will be no issue at all, even if it's a _Boraras merah_. You might even have to step back a bit!!

Cheers,

----------


## StanChung

Welcome to AQ Ted!

If only the highly acclaimed AF 200mm f/4 Micro-Nikkor IF AI-S is an AF-S instead[and 1:1 instead of 1:2]. Then you can have the best of both worlds! Manual and Fast AF to catch small darting fish.

What I normally do is shoot RAW with my Tamron 90 and crop. Not great but sufficient for my uses.  :Smile:

----------


## wasabi8888

> Welcome to AQ Ted!
> 
> If only the highly acclaimed AF 200mm f/4 Micro-Nikkor IF AI-S is an AF-S instead[and 1:1 instead of 1:2]. Then you can have the best of both worlds! Manual and Fast AF to catch small darting fish.
> 
> What I normally do is shoot RAW with my Tamron 90 and crop. Not great but sufficient for my uses.



Stan

Tried to look for it but could not find in the glossary at nikon's page.

What is AI-S and AF-S?

----------


## StanChung

Forgot what is AI-S-something to do with mount.  :Opps: 

Edit-found a site explaining AI, AI-S etc. http://www.nikonlinks.com/unklbil/nomenclature.htm

AF-S is their hi speed silent wave motor for faster focussing ala Canon's USM.

----------


## wasabi8888

I think after so much discussion and reading other stuff, i am looking at the below

1. Nikon 105mm VR
2. Sigma 80-200mm
3. Tamron 90mm


I think end of the day if I want really close up, i prob also need close-up filter...

----------


## Goondoo

> I think after so much discussion and reading other stuff, i am looking at the below
> 
> 1. Nikon 105mm VR
> 2. Sigma 80-200mm
> 3. Tamron 90mm
> 
> 
> I think end of the day if I want really close up, i prob also need close-up filter...


Actually, there are still other prime macro lenses you can consider if budget is part of your concern, such as Sigma, Tokina etc. If you have $600, just grab the Tamron. I won't even recommend tele-lenses for real macro pictures unless quality is not what you are after.....  :Angel:

----------


## Green Baron

> I think after so much discussion and reading other stuff, i am looking at the below
> 
> 1. Nikon 105mm VR
> 2. Sigma 80-200mm
> 3. Tamron 90mm
> 
> 
> I think end of the day if I want really close up, i prob also need close-up filter...


It all depends on how much magnification you need. 

If you are short of cash, get a 2nd hand Tamron. Should you decide to 'upgrade' later, you can sell off the 2nd hand Tamron with very minimal loss.

For most amatures, the technique and skills affect the image quality more than the lens ;-)

Two features in the Nikon 105 (and Canon 100) which I like are :

1. Override Auto-focus without having to push a dial (Sigma) or push/pull the focusing ring (Tamron). After the lens auto-focused, you can fine tune the focus just by rotating the focusing ring. This is very useful for those who use AF and need to fine tune the focus on the fly. 

2. Internal Focusing (IF) - The lens stays the same length. Tamron and Singma will protrude out when you focus on a close up subject. Not an issue for taking fish and plants but nice to have for skittish insects.

----------


## wasabi8888

Billy

Budget is not a concern...and quality is important as well...

By the way, i read about 6T for Nikon.. has anyone used them? seen some pics.. and it seems really good... now confused again... :Smile:

----------


## Green Baron

In that case no need to think liao. Go for the Nikon !

----------


## wasabi8888

I found out what 6T is... it's a Nikon close up filter.... :Smile: 

Green Baron, still considering... not sure that focal length is good for insects photography... need to go test the sigma 70-300mm Macro .. heard it's a darn good lens for macro

----------


## Goondoo

> I found out what 6T is... it's a Nikon close up filter....
> 
> Green Baron, still considering... not sure that focal length is good for insects photography... need to go test the sigma 70-300mm Macro .. heard it's a darn good lens for macro


I don't think tele-lenses will ever beat a prime, else Mr Simon won't upgrade to Tamron 180mm  :Razz:

----------


## hwchoy

the Sigma 70-300 is only 1:2 macro, i.e. half of life size. the rest of the prime macros are 1:1. With these you would hardly need any more close-up filters.

----------


## StanChung

I have considered the sigma 70-300 f4.5-5.6 years ago and I bought the nikkor 80-200AF-D. ED.[not a macro lens] I never use auto exposure since i the bg varies a lot so zooming mean compensating and this slows the moment.

Why? Variable aperture. Zoom in and it closes about a stop. Since I use manual flash power settings, this is a B to compensate everytime.
Dark thru the lens-can't see very well because max aperture is only 4.5-5.6. This lesson I learnt when i bought a 70-210 sigma f4-5.6.
BTW, i have great eyesight, I can[or atleast used to be able] read slanted signboards 30ft away that guys younger than me can't.

Manual focus becomes a @#$%. unless you're a cat or owl. 
AF hunts more if TTL[thru the lens] is dark.

IMHO, you only have two horse race. 105VR since cost is not a problem and the Tamron 90mm DI.[this one according to user reviews is hit and miss, some times you can get duds, some luck is needed.]

When buying lenses, bring a torchlight-mag-light to shine thru the lens for artifacts[dust etc]. Make sure you it's spotless. If the retailer gives you lip, just go to another store, after all this is not a $2 purchase.

Nikon is wanting in the pro area. If you have a D80, you are in the mid to upper range which is good because this area is not the area where you make a living out[still can depending on application] of but still want solid pictures to be proud of.

I ordered my SU800. Very happy.

Good luck Wasabi, all the sifu's have spoken, in the end, like what Baron says, it's you that will make or break the pictures.
Take it one step at a time. you buy the best now but years later a new one comes along and... :Twisted Evil:  and piangz! [whatever that means]

Read this very informative web. good discussion on Nikon VS Canon. http://www.camerahobby.com/index.htm

It's about how we niggle on the quality for naught. It's so subjective. eg bokeh. Here's a good site to compare bokeh for some Nikon lenses. Just use what you like as Ken Rockwell sayshere http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/bokeh-comparison.htm
My fav is the 80-200mm AF-S . The next is the 80-400mm VR. Then again this changes as the subjects get closer and the DOF [depth of field] changes.

In the end, if you don't go out and take pictures, all that equipment is wasted and just sits there depreciating. Get yourself a dry box. You will thank me later. I have 3 lenses to be serviced and it costs the amount for the dry box!  :Exasperated:  
It's for the long term, in case you need to upgrade later your lenses/camera will not be fungused and can fetch a good price.

----------


## Green Baron

Agree with the rest. Forget the zoom. The Tamron 180 is a very good lens but it is also bigger and heavier. You can get 1:1 with er either 100 or 180. 180 gives you longer working distance but you lose 1 or 2 stops because you need higher speed to handhold it. With the VR you gain another 2 stops.




> IMy fav is the 80-200mm AF-S . The next is the 80-400mm VR. Then again this changes as the subjects get closer and the DOF [depth of field] changes.


Sorry for the OT .. I am also considering a long lens for shooting butterflies which are not within the reach of 180mm lens. I had the opportunity to use the 80-400VR recently and am very impressed with the quality of the image and the VR. I managed to get a few shots of a few rare butterflies which otherwise would only be a visual image. Main draw backs are it is not IF and you need to manually switch between Auto and manual focus. Of couse it also costs a bomb ! AFS-70-300 VR seems perfect in theory and more afforable but I assume the IQ will not be as good .

----------


## wasabi8888

> the Sigma 70-300 is only 1:2 macro, i.e. half of life size. the rest of the prime macros are 1:1. With these you would hardly need any more close-up filters.


CHoy

Dun really understand.. sorry i am quite new at this...

which is better? 1:1 or 1:2?

Unless I am wrong, `1:2 means twice the size that you see....

when you mentioned "with these", are you referring to sigma or prime lenses?

----------


## wasabi8888

Also, just bought the SB800 today.. 2 more lenses to go...

85mm 1.4 and
a macro lens which after reading all the sifus, still cant make up my mind... 

I went again to Cathay to try the 105VR and 70-300 Sigma... seems like quality of the 105mm is still the best...just that the working distance bothers me like hell...


the rest of Nikon enses that stan mentioned seemed not to be for Macro rite? there are more zoom lenses.. can i do close-ups of insects with that?

----------


## hwchoy

> CHoy
> 
> Dun really understand.. sorry i am quite new at this...
> 
> which is better? 1:1 or 1:2?
> 
> Unless I am wrong, `1:2 means twice the size that you see....
> 
> when you mentioned "with these", are you referring to sigma or prime lenses?


hey you have to read more carefully. "the Sigma 70-300 is only 1:2 macro, i.e. half of life size." this is how it is marked on the lenses, 1:1 means life size, 1:2 means half life size, 1:4 means a quarter, etc etc.

you cannot compare a zoom "macro" with a real macro prime. first of all the zoom only gives you half the magnification of that 105mm VR macro. if you are shooting anything smaller than 2cm, you will want a 1:1 true macro lens. second, a macro lens are designed to eliminate distortions at such extreme focusing distances. this is why they are bigger and cost more than the run of the mill prime and zoom "macros".

working distance isn't really a problem, its a fact of life you will just have to deal with in your set up and techniques.

----------


## wasabi8888

Hwchoy

I did read carefully, but i guessed my friend just told me the other way round...

Thanks for the advice though.. really appreciate it..

----------


## Simon

that is why prime lens cost more  :Smile:

----------


## hwchoy

> Hwchoy
> 
> I did read carefully, but i guessed my friend just told me the other way round...
> 
> Thanks for the advice though.. really appreciate it..


I'm sorry I didn't mean it to sound quite so harsh. it could well be convention though, but what I have described is how the lens makers mark them.

----------


## valice

> 85mm 1.4 and
> a macro lens which after reading all the sifus, still cant make up my mind... 
> 
> I went again to Cathay to try the 105VR and 70-300 Sigma... seems like quality of the 105mm is still the best...just that the working distance bothers me like hell...


These days I love to ask this question.
Why you want to buy the 85mm for?

What kind of working distance you are looking for? Maximum 1:1 macro lens is 180mm. You can consider that if you are thinking that you will be shooting jittery bugs. But then, you must consider the weight factor as that lens is not light.

----------


## hwchoy

how much is that Nikkor 85/1.4? Canon only have 85/1.8 and 85/1.2, the former is not quite ultra fast enough for my fantasy, and the latter too insanely expensive.

Vince, the 85/1.4 is a great portrait lens. but works better on a full frame camera in terms of perspective.

----------


## valice

:Laughing:  Yah, that lens is famous for portrait. But just want to know if he is buying that specific lens because he has a need or just because people say it is so.

Really don't want to see friends throwing money into this deep pit for nothing.

----------


## hwchoy

that's true, especially when we can't offer to buy the white elephants off him at a friendly discount.

----------


## valice

The lens is white meh? Thought only Canon is white?  :Grin:

----------


## StanChung

Vincent,
Some Nikon's are dressed like the enemy now.  :Wink:  

Wasabi, Zoom macros are mostly pseudo macro. 1:3 also can call themselves macro! Ruined the term 'macro' IMO.




> Yah, that lens is famous for portrait. But just want to know if he is buying that specific lens because he has a need or just because people say it is so.
> 
> Really don't want to see friends throwing money into this deep pit for nothing.


Glamour mah! I also have fantasy of having this lens to get only the eyes sharp. Nose, mouth all outfo [jargon for 'out of focus'].

For purist-pay more for lens and no need to learn photoshop and can act as smug proud owner of glamour lens with stunning bokeh[soft quality defocussed bg or fg ].  :Grin: 

For advertising- to get good bokeh can photoshop with lens defocus to a certain extent . Not as good as the real thing though but more control if the client says bg too distracting...bla bla bla.  :Roll Eyes:

----------


## tawauboy

> how much is that Nikkor 85/1.4? .........


this "cream machine" cost about 1.6k.

----------


## wasabi8888

Anyway, i have decided to get the 105mm VR, since i really like macro photography of flowers and insects. I understand that it will be a challenge for the insects, but i guess I can get TC 1.7X or 2X if I need to (not preferable). Worst come to worst, get the 200mm Nikkor lenses.

Vincent, the 85mm 1.4 is for potrait lah... that one not so much a priority... I understand your point about getting lenses because people around me also get. Thanks for the concern.... I will re-evaluate that lens. I know it's a great lens though, just that I need to see the difference myself...

Well, i have bought the SB800 over the weekend. I did not buy the cord though.. I need your advice on the cord... WHat is it called? is it to remotely trigger off the SB800 without triggering off the built in flash?

----------


## StanChung

Good of you to make your choice. The cord you need is sc 28 or sc 29[additional features].

It hooks onto your cam flash mount on one side and your flash on the other to give you lots of lighting options, direction being the most important.

----------


## wasabi8888

Thanks Stan... will get that soon.. still reading the manual for the flash.. really complicated.. but i have tried to use it.. and it's great.. now i know the difference between images taken with built-in and external flash..

----------


## valice

> Vincent, the 85mm 1.4 is for potrait lah... that one not so much a priority... I understand your point about getting lenses because people around me also get. Thanks for the concern.... I will re-evaluate that lens. I know it's a great lens though, just that I need to see the difference myself...


Borrow!!!  :Laughing: 
That's why we use Canon EOS!  :Grin:

----------


## benny

Hi guys,

I've splited some of the previous discussion into the following threads:

Using the commander mode for Nikon system

Magnification and crop factor

Cheers,

----------


## valice

Thanks benny. Guess the discussion went all over the place for a moment.

----------

