105mm macro lens

[Netskimmer]

We've had some macro lens threads recently but I have some specific questions. I have heard many people recommend the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 VR but a $900-$1,000 it's a little on the high side. I was also looking into the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 and the Tamron 90mm f/2.8. Both are between $400-$600 but neither seem to have any kind of image stabilization which could be really helpful with macros. I have also heard that Sigma models are hit and miss in regards to quality. So, to my questions.

1. Is image stabilization (or lack there of) crucial for a macro lens?
2. Is this Sigma lens a good lens or one of the problem models?
3. How profound is the difference between the Tamron 90mm focal length and the 105mm of the others? There isn't much difference between 90mm and 105mm on my Nikon 55-300mm but I don't know if that translates the same in a macro lens.
4. How does the image quality of the Tamron and Sigma stack up against the Nikon lens?

 

[Overread]

Image stabilization is not crucial for macro photography, in fact until recent times Nikon was the only big brand with a VR lens on the market. Furthermore VR/OS/IS is typically of less use at macro distances because of the increased effect of vibrations on the image although canon has somewhat trumped this with their new hybrid IS which is of slightly more use for macro work.

In the end though it still stands that its not essential - its a really great boon to have and will have to some degree; and further its a great addition for regular distance work with the lens .

2) The prime macro lenses from Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Canon and Nikon are all top rate lenses; whilst not all built to the same "built like a tank" standard they are all generally well build and good options on the market.

3) At macro distances focal length means nothing to the final frame itself - a 35mm to a 300mm macro lens at 1:1 gives the exact same image frame capture - what will change is the background rendering with the longer focal length options giving considerably more blur to the background than shorter focal length options. What is different is working distances with shorter length lenses giving less distance to work with - at 90-105mm the difference here is tiny.

4) Can't tell them apart - and the same is true of pretty much all the macro lenses on the market. They are top quality optics and perform to a very high standard. Whilst there will be differences and studio tests might well show these up, the differences (esp after processing) will be very minor and will not be the kind that can be told apart in regular shooting and production of photos.

 

[NikonME]

Image stabilization is stabilizing hand shake. Since you will likely be using a tripod it is not necessary. You really should shut off image stabilization while you are on a tripod, because it can actually cause some vibration in that situation.

 

[mrpink]

Since you will likely be using a tripod it is not necessary.

Why? I didn't read where he said what type of macro photography he is interested in...

If you want to shoot bugs, VR is vital.

I say save up for the 105mm VR, it is worth it for sure.






p!nK

 

[Overread]

VR, tripods, flash - in the macro world people using one of those three main aids is often of the opinion that it is essential for good macro photography. The truth is that personal shooting style and method come into it a lot - you can shoot sharp shots with pure natural light - you can shoot sharp shots without a tripod- you can shoot sharp shots without VR (heck the majority already do).

Each method has its advantages and flash is oft one that many find they can't easily shoot without (esp if shooting live subjects handheld) however its wrong to consider any an "essential" component.

 

[Netskimmer]

Thanks for all the responses! I want to do mostly nature macro (bugs, flowers, ect) so I'm not sure how easy it would be to use a tripod. It shouldn't be difficult with flowers but insects might be a different story. I will have to do some more reading. In the mean time I have a Kenko tube set on the way to play with.

Overread, I'm glad you brought up a flash, that was my next concern. I plan on getting a ring flash but I know next to nothing about them. The price ranges are from $30-$600, obviously there is a difference. what do I need to look for in a good ring flash?

 

[Overread]

Despite being listed as macro flashes I don't recommend them to people starting in macro work; they give a very flat light overall and whilst you can adjust (on most units) the balance to have left or right stronger (so as to give some shadowing) they are harder to diffuse than regular flash units.
Furthermore their power and lighting effect is weaker than regular flashes and thus their applications outside of macro work are far more limited - they can be used for portraits (though the more typical ring flash for these is linked to a regular flash and has a much larger ring section, for more diffusion, not the small ring that a ringflash has).


Thus I recommend that they get a good quality speedlite design flash - either an ownbrand one or a 3rd party option with good manual power controls (3rd brand auto only are often very limiting and fiddly to use). That combined with a bracket and a softbox for diffusion gives good light for starting macro work and leaves the unit open to be used in pretty much any other photographic field - in addition it gives a simple, one light introduction into the lighting world for the macro photographer (lighting here can be simple or as complex as full on studio work - but in miniature).

For a bracket the RAM-Mount option has become very popular for its cheap price, combined with being both strong enough to hold heavy top of the range flashes (eg 580EX2 or SB900?) without any wobble (something that really does make close up/macro shooting a lot harder). There are similarly priced/cheaper mounts on ebay, but many are thin metals and don't give as strong a hold over the flash
RAM-Mount approach: My very flexible Macro flashbracket: Lighting Technique Forum: Digital Photography Review

As for a softbox that can be anything from a Lumiquest regular softbox to a home made variation (google will give many results for this)

 

[Arkanjel Imaging]

Since you will likely be using a tripod it is not necessary.

Why? I didn't read where he said what type of macro photography he is interested in...

If you want to shoot bugs, VR is vital.

I say save up for the 105mm VR, it is worth it for sure.



p!nK

Not true. VR is pretty useless for macro. You end up with sharper images without it. It will hold the image a bit steadier for you to compose a shot. But it will not positively affect your images. VR just cant adjust fast enough to compensate at those mags. There is actually a farily narrow range of shutter speeds that VR is of much use. Its a huge marketing tool. Everything Ive shot in the last year has been without VR enabled.


That being said I do highly recommend the Nik 105. Its tough, sharp and handles really well. Feels much smoother in function that the "off" brands Ive tried. Image quality however is pretty close across the board.


Edit: I would stay away from ring flashes. Overread hit on the good points already.

 

[Netskimmer]

Wow, that's a lot of info, thanks! So no ring flash. I'll invest in a Speedlite. Not sure if I'll go with an 700, 800, or 900. I've heard a few people say they actually prefer the 800 over the 900 but that's probably a whole new thread.

So Arkanjel, what your saying is that the the only advantage to the Nik is smoother action and a more solid build (not that the others are cheaply made, just not made as well as the Nik). At twice the price, I'm not sure that it would be worth it, but like I said, I'll have to do more reading.

 

[Overread]

Reading is only going to get you so far with macro lenses - mostly because each review will end with a high score and a very positive result - though do go through user reviews and try to pick up as many quirks with handling and interaction with the lens that you can. In the end though you can't really make a "bad" choice as such - though specific users will have their own demands and here in lies most of the advantage/disadvantage of one lens over the other.

A shop test might well be in order if you find choosing to be difficult - get a proper feel for those build differences; the responsiveness and the overall weight/size usage of the lenses that you can.

Otherwise the only "mistake" you could make as a Nikon shooter in the prime macro lenses that I know of is going for the Tokina 35mm macro and not realising that its 1:1 focusing distance is a whole new world of difficult working and lighting (it makes the MPE 65mm look easy sometimes ) - even then you've still got yourself some great regular functioning lens optics.

 

[Netskimmer]

Cool, I will see if I can find a shop somewhere to get some hands on time with them. This could be difficult since I live in the sticks but considering the dollar figures, it would be worth the drive.

 

[digital flower]

I turn off the VR on my 105 when shooting closeups. It was expensive lens but is heavy duty. Super sharp.

My favorite Nikon macro lens is the 60mm/2.8.

 

[table1349]

Wow, that's a lot of info, thanks! So no ring flash. I'll invest in a Speedlite. Not sure if I'll go with an 700, 800, or 900. I've heard a few people say they actually prefer the 800 over the 900 but that's probably a whole new thread.

So Arkanjel, what your saying is that the the only advantage to the Nik is smoother action and a more solid build (not that the others are cheaply made, just not made as well as the Nik). At twice the price, I'm not sure that it would be worth it, but like I said, I'll have to do more reading.

Depending on what else you like to shoot, you may want to look into a pair of Speedlites instead of just one. The same principles of light apply to macro as to other forms of photography. When I shoot macro I have a pair of 580's on a flash bracket that allows me to place the lens heads where I want and vary the ratio of light between the two. I agree that ring lights in general are not that ideal for Macro photography unless you want to buy something like this. I accomplish the same thing with a dual arm flash bracket and a pair of 580's. More cost effective as I can use the 580's for a lot more than I could Canon's similar twin head macro flash.

 

[Netskimmer]

Wow, that's a lot of info, thanks! So no ring flash. I'll invest in a Speedlite. Not sure if I'll go with an 700, 800, or 900. I've heard a few people say they actually prefer the 800 over the 900 but that's probably a whole new thread.

So Arkanjel, what your saying is that the the only advantage to the Nik is smoother action and a more solid build (not that the others are cheaply made, just not made as well as the Nik). At twice the price, I'm not sure that it would be worth it, but like I said, I'll have to do more reading.

Depending on what else you like to shoot, you may want to look into a pair of Speedlites instead of just one. The same principles of light apply to macro as to other forms of photography. When I shoot macro I have a pair of 580's on a flash bracket that allows me to place the lens heads where I want and vary the ratio of light between the two. I agree that ring lights in general are not that ideal for Macro photography unless you want to buy something like this. I accomplish the same thing with a dual arm flash bracket and a pair of 580's. More cost effective as I can use the 580's for a lot more than I could Canon's similar twin head macro flash.

I plan on getting more that one flash eventually just not at the same time. When I pick up my second flash I may pickup a dual bracket as well. My only concern is the bulk and weight a setup like that would have. Do you find it difficult to use?

I turn off the VR on my 105 when shooting closeups. It was expensive lens but is heavy duty. Super sharp.

My favorite Nikon macro lens is the 60mm/2.8.

That looks like a reasonably priced lens. The problem I have is that I don't know what focal length I would prefer. Perhaps after I play with the extention tubes I'll have a better idea of what I want.

 

[djacobox372]

Since you own a d7000 which is fully compAtible with non-CPU lenses, why not opt for a 105mm 2.8 ais micro manual focus lens. Same great optics, and a better build quality for 1/3 the price. Vr and autofocus are unnecessary for macro photography.