Please recommend a macro/micro lens for my Nikon SLR

Shac said:
105 f4 micro nikkor Ai or AiS - greater working distance than 50/60mm, great IQ and low $$
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth. I just put an ai kit on mine a good a pleasant surprise. Great bang for the buck.

Bob
 
RichardKarash said:
First, I agree with all the advice above.

Second, Akiva, it depends on your budget and what you want to do. The easiest way in with your MF Nikon SLR is the 55mm f/3.5 which will produce amazing closeups, and it's a lot of fun.

But, what do you really want to do? In macro, the photo task drives the equipment choice. For closeups of a flower, a hand, even jewelry, a 55mm macro is great. For insects and small critters, a 90mm or 200mm macro gives you more lens-to-subject distance. For optimal results at 1:1 slide copying, there are lenses specifically designed for this. To shoot something 1/4" in size (so the film or sensor image is 4x the subject) you want a special set-up just for this (e.g. 55 f/2.8 reversed on a bellows). For 10x or 20x things get more exotic.

Nikon macro lenses are terrific. The 55's are also good for general use. I suggest starting with one of these, unless you have a specific need.
Click to expand...
here in South Florida the flowers and other plants are amazing, just in my backyard alone. I want to be able to capture this. The 55mm sounds good to me.
 
The other accessory useful for macro-photography, a ring-light. Vivitar made an inexpensive one not long ago. Now, very cheap LED-powered Ring Lights are available on Ebay. Mine was not cheap- a Nikon SB-29, gets a lot of use.
 
money no object: Zeiss ZF 100/2 makro (sharpest macro lens ever) - big heavy (tripod use) and expensive but the focus throw is incredibly long and therefore precise (required for a f2 100mm lens)...

alternatively, I second Ferider's recommendation of the Vivitar series 1 90/2.5
 
A very good alternative to the Vivitar Series 1 is the Kiron 105mm f2.8
Edit- The Kiron gets to 1:1 without the need for an extension tube
 
Last edited:
I love these threads, sure fire way to find out every macro lens made for the Nikon. Okay- DO NOT GET the 55/3.5 compensating Nikkor!

I had an easy time figuring out which Micro-Nikkors to buy with my D1x's. Asked the Nikon Rep what was in current production, bought them.
 
I have a Micro-Nikkor Ai-S 105mm f2.8, and love it. I use it for all my "product" shots. I prefer to have a bit of "working distance" from the subject, so wouldn't want anything shorter than 100/105mm. Just my two yen...
 
I don't know how serious you need a macro lens, but I - myself prefer a reversal-ring to accompany my 50mm lens. Very easy to carry and cost to nothing.
 
Remember that the 55/3.5 has been around for a long time, and many are pre-AI. They can be converted, if not AI already. All of the 55/2.8's can be acquired without worrying about it being non-AI. The 55/2.8 and 55/3.5 generally cost much less than the 105/2.8. My "55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor-P" (non-compensating) was $25. The "55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor" (no P) was had a complex aperture mechanism that opened up to compensate exposure for close range for non-TTL meters, like the Photomic Bullseye. Optically, both 55/3.5's are identical.

The Vivitar Series 1 macros are reputed to be quite good, I have not personally used the 90. I have the Vivitar 55/2.8 in Konica mount, will focus to 1:1 without tubes.
 
For flowers, 105mm or shorter should be fine. My favorite is the Kiron 105/2.8.

One other possibility is to get a 20/3.5 AIS lens and a K1 extension ring for nice wide angle macros where focusing distance is limited to only a few inches.
 
In the end it is pretty hard to find a really bad macro lens. I think whoever makes the macro lens they take extra care to get it right because people who use them tend to be fussy about performance.

Bob
 
Is anyone familiar with the Sigma 90mm f2.8 MF lens? Apparently this was made in both AF and MF, I'm guessing in the 90's or early 2000's?
Any good?
 
I have 2 'macro' lenses (or in Nikon vocab, 'micro' lenses) for Nikon: The AF-D 60mm f/2.8. It's also a superb all around lens that is extremely sharp in the range from 1:1 to 10:1 and merely very sharp from there to infinity. It doubles as a fine portrait and architectural lens.

Here's a gallery of photos I have made with it.

The other macro I have for my Nikons is the fabled "Lester Dine" dental, close-up lens. It's optimized for taking pictures of teeth, with a special flash unit. It's a very nice 105mm f/2.8 lens made by Kiron. It has more acuity than the Nikkor with the same specification, but lacks Vibration Reduction. Since it is designed to be used with a "macro" flash, this is not a problem, since the average exposure time is about 40 microseconds. Although it is marked at infinity, my lens does not quite make it there at f/2.8. By f/11 it has acceptable infinity focus though.

If I would need to choose one of these, I'f keep the 60. It is more versatile, and I rather like the way it works as a nearly-normal lens.
 
I'll go with Raid on this one- I've had my Tamron 90mm F/2.5 for years, and absolutely love it.
(It only goes to 1:2 with out a tube, but if you pick up the Flat-Field 2x converter they made for it, you get a 180mm that goes from infinity to 1:1.)

Tamron has always seemed to make good macro lenses.

-Brian
 
The ZF 100/2 is a terrific lens, I have it in the Contax N mount. I also like the ZF 50/2 Makro Planar, very nice and razor sharp with terrific build quality. Too bad I only use it a few times a year, now that I think about it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top