105mm Micro-Nikkor?

quad b · Aug 9, 2007

Well, I've been looking into purchasing the 105mm Micro-Nikkor Vibration Reduction lense for some close up work. Now it's about $1500 Australian and thats a bit of money for a uni student like me...so I'm wondering if it's worth it. I have only managed to find review sites on the internet that are from a sales point of view only talk of the positives...so not real good reviews. Also I've tried to hire one but no where in Sydney will

Could anyone here give me some advice on this lense OR point me to some good reviews please?

Thanks everyone...

Chris of Arabia · Aug 9, 2007

It's not quite there yet with that lens, but here's a site I found by typing Nikon | Lens | Reviews into Google

Don Simon · Aug 9, 2007

The obvious question... how much do you think you'd need the VR. By that I don't mean how effective is the VR... I'm sure it can work wonders and it would be nice to have it if you could justify the cost... but rather, do you think you would regularly need the VR?

If the VR would not be essential and you want a very good quality macro, I'd suggest checking out a non-VR model, or a Tokina, Tamron or Sigma... depending on your camera, you may be able to use one of the classic Nikkors which would obviously cost quite a bit less. Personally I can imagine a good macro flash setup being more useful than the VR, but that's just me.

Having said all that, here's some reviews for the VR model...
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_105_28vr/index.htm
http://www.bythom.com/105AFSlens.htm

ANDS! · Aug 9, 2007

Sigma 105 macro for far less than that. Might want to check into the Sigma variant.

notelliot · Aug 9, 2007

check out the 105 micro without vr before looking at third party lenses.

snownow · Aug 9, 2007

I have heard alot of good about this lens. check out http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=122399&highlight=105vr for some people that have used it. If its the price your looking at i hear the 90mm tamron is as sharp, and $350 US.

Chris of Arabia · Aug 9, 2007

I had one of the Adaptall2 90mm Tamrons when I had my old A1s - without doubt my favourite lens at the time and easily as good as what the big names were producing. The newer ones seem to get good reviews too and are certainly worth a look.

quad b · Aug 10, 2007

thanks for the replies everyone....

its not the price im too worried about, but i want a good macro lense. at the moment i'm using my 50mm with close-up filters on the end. these aren't very sharp and don't let in very much light at all. so i'm open to anything better than my curretn set-up.

Don Simon · Aug 10, 2007

Any dedicated macro lens should be better. Nikkors (new or classic), Tamrons, Tokinas or Sigmas would all qualify as very good macro lenses. A Micro-Nikkor has the advantage of the lens barrel not extending, and the VR obviously has the advantage of VR. Question is whether those things justify the extra cost for you. $1500 AUS is definitely a lot of money if you don't expect to recoup the costs from professional work.

airgunr · Aug 10, 2007

I've got the 105mm AF VR and the regular 105mm AF Micro Nikkors.

Unless you absolutely need the VR I would look at the regular AF Micro Nikkor. You can get some decent deals on the the used ones and the optics are superb! Most macro work is so close that you would be using a tripod and focusing rail more than the VR function.

If you've got money to burn check out the Zeiss Makro-Planar T* f2/100mm ZF for the Nikon mount. It's fully manual but great optics. You can also adjust the apertures in 1/2 stops.