Macro Lens for Nikkon D3200

artemiscables · Oct 7, 2013

Hello, :hail:

I have the D3200 and would like a better lens for Macro Photography.
It came with the stock 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G AF-S VR which wasn't as clear/close as i wanted them so here i am asking you all.

Based on this review i have found: Best macro lens for Nikons: 8 tested | News | TechRadar

Would the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 SP AF Di Macro (Non-VC) or Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM be a better suitor for me who owns the D3200?
I know that the Sigma 105mm is in a different league (higher end), so if i gotten that one, should i buy a newer body camera body? Would i get more features by doing so?

I usually take photos in manual, so AF isn't really required. Usually the photos i take are of cables (being in the cable business) and i wanted them as detailed/aesthetically pleasing as possible.

sleist · Oct 7, 2013

The Tamron 90 is excellent. I own this (well my son does - same difference

).
Also consider the Tokina 100mm. Ive not used this but it is said to quite nice with superb bokeh.
The Nikon 60mm micro (D or G) is also considered to be excellent so long as you don't need the working distance.
I own the Sigma 150mm macro (non OS version) and I think it's superb, but I think the shorter focal lengths might be better for your stated purpose.
I don't know much about the Sigma 105, but I think I recall people saying the OS version was more expensive and less sharp than the older non OS version.

To be honest, it's hard to go wrong with any macro lens with the possible exception of the Nikon DX micros.

GDHLEWIS · Oct 7, 2013

Iv got a D3200 and the own the Sigma 50 macro and found it an excellent lens for static object such a cables and I just received a Tamron 180 macro this morning. I have not tried the Sigma 105 but from what I have read it is a very good lens. All macro lens's are very good as stated by Sleist so which ever you choose you cant really go wrong. I would base your choice on the available light you will be shooting in. If you will be shooting in low light then your going to need one of the faster lens's, if like me you'll be shooting in very bright conditions then you can afford to get a slightly slower lens which should drop purchase price as well (should). All the lens's on your link will be more than good enough for your requirements. Best thing for you to do is if possible to go to a shop with your camera and try the different lens's and see which your more comfortable with, manual focusing with a proper macro is a lot different to focusing with your kit lens, macro has such little room for error that you wouldn't notice it by looking on the back of your camera. Might be worth finding out where the closest repair shop is and what brands they service and using that as a factor in your decision. In the end all will produce excellent quality images with the only real difference being in the price, but will say one thing internal focusing is better IMO than the ones that have extending front elements. But it is an easy work around issue.

Good luck

artemiscables · Oct 7, 2013

Thank you so much for the reply sleist and GDHLEWIS!

The Nikon 60mm's are clear indeed from what i have experience, but it gets a little too close to the subject and casts shadow/blocks my lighting equipment which isn't favorable.

I've heard that the Tamron 90mm is just as good, but just not offering enough of the auto-focus.
Since i have a camera such as the D3200, i thought, since everything was better off being shot in manual, why not buy a great manual type macro lens (Tamrom 90mm) and save some money taking manual shots.
Then it hit me. Since this hobby only goes up from here, there is most likely a future upgrade in line for me (Nikon D7100/D7200 perhaps), so i looked at the more future proof Sigma 105.

From what i've read and what GDHLEWIS has said, the Sigma 105mm offers internal focusing which to me, is a must have, so i think i've settled on my decision.
As for a follow up question, would upgrading the body to something like, say the D7100 be that significant of an improvement to the overall image quality?
It seems that during my research on this newly found hobby that the lens itself has more importance in output quality, so im not sure if upgrading the body would improve much on semi-macro shots of cable/wires.

To sleist:
What has been your experience like with the Tamron 90mm? Particularly the long barrel that comes out. Doesn't that get annoying? Do you use your sun hood?

To GDHLEIS:
How does one know which lens is "faster"? So far i'm only knowlegeable when it comes to max shutter speed, but that is related to the body and is a whole different subject (but has to do with lighting).

cgipson1 · Oct 7, 2013

As Sleist mentioned... the Tokina 100 2.8 or the Tamron 90 are both great macro lenses... especially when you pick them up used. Anything shorter than 90 is difficult to light, since the lens is so close to the subject.. and being close also frightens insects if you want to shoot those.

Almost all GOOD macro is shot in manual focus mode... as AF lacks the precision at close distances.... so don't let some advertising spiel make you decision for you.

GDHLEWIS · Oct 7, 2013

a lens with a max aperture of 2 is faster than a lens with an aperture of 2.8. My Sigma 50mm 2.8 has the extending front element and it can get in the way of lighting gear (shadows etc...) but I always found easy enough work arounds when using my 3 Speedlight's.

cgipson1 · Oct 7, 2013

GDHLEWIS said:
a lens with a max aperture of 2 is faster than a lens with an aperture of 2.8. My Sigma 50mm 2.8 has the extending front element and it can get in the way of lighting gear (shadows etc...) but I always found easy enough work arounds when using my 3 Speedlight's.

3 Flashes? WOW! Do you actually carry all three out into the field with you when you are shooting bugs? Seems like it would be a lot easier to just buy a longer lens!

That must weigh a ton... I will just stick to my 105m... and use one flash, or my R1C1's

cgipson1 · Oct 7, 2013

Oh.. OP.. most macro is shot at F16 to F22... as DOF is minimal at the close distances in Macro.... so having a fast lens is not that important either (for macro, at least). But most macro lenses do well as a general lens also.. and it does come in handy there. Focus can be a little twitchy at distances out of macro range... but it can work.

sleist · Oct 7, 2013

To sleist:
What has been your experience like with the Tamron 90mm? Particularly the long barrel that comes out. Doesn't that get annoying? Do you use your sun hood?

My son uses the Tamron 90mm on the D5000. The lens will AF on the D5000 so it will also AF on your body.
All macro lenses focus slowly compared to regular primes. The Tamron is a bit slower than others, but not at all bad to be honest.
Construction is a bit plasticy, but that also makes it quite light relatively speaking.
The barrel extends a bit while focusing, but well within the minimum focus distance. I always use hoods.
The only issue I might have with the barrel would be if I wanted to use my Nikon R1 close-up speed light system with it,
as it mounts on the lens barrel and would strain the focus motor and put extra stress on the barrel.
Image quality is very good and bokeh is quite pleasing.

Tamron 90 on Nikon D90:

Tamron 90 on D5000

GDHLEWIS · Oct 7, 2013

Don't generally take the flash's in to the field, well maybe one. Use three flashes for in studio stuff mainly (studio = large cardboard box). I have attempted shooting bugs but my 50 Sigma just is too short a focal length really, just received my 180 Tamron so looking forward to shooting creepy crawlies now

goodguy · Oct 7, 2013

I have the Nikon 60mm 2.8G and really love it, it does have the disadvantage of the need to get closer to subject compared to other lenses but for me its perfect, it is an amazingly sharp lens that does lots and not just macro and I wanted such a lens.

artemiscables · Oct 7, 2013

Thank you for all your help.

I have just pulled the switch on the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM.
105mm should give me a bit more room for my studio lights.

@ GDHLEWIS

So for low level light i should be shooting in the lowest f/* and slightly higher ISO correct? What about shutter speed? I am usually at 1/8 on a tripod for stabilization to let as much light in as i can, am i doing this correctly? I notice people sellers on places like ebay take pictures of their products with backgrounds such as white cloth or acrylic panels. How does it show up to be so white in the photos without overly brightening the product itself? I tried to do the same but had to adjust brightness levels which kills the product's color. Is this from white balance adjustment setting?

@ sleist

Those are some crazy nice pictures! I really hope that i will be able to do shots like those. Are you using some kind of light on your camera?
I am clueless when it comes to lights for camera. I see people have those lights with a cap that evens out the flashes but i have no idea what their purposes is for.

sleist · Oct 7, 2013

@ sleist

Those are some crazy nice pictures! I really hope that i will be able to do shots like those. Are you using some kind of light on your camera?
I am clueless when it comes to lights for camera. I see people have those lights with a cap that evens out the flashes but i have no idea what their purposes is for.

I do use flash at times, but these examples are natural light.

GDHLEWIS · Oct 7, 2013

artemiscables said:
Thank you for all your help.

I have just pulled the switch on the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM.
105mm should give me a bit more room for my studio lights.

@ GDHLEWIS
So for low level light i should be shooting in the lowest f/* and slightly higher ISO correct? What about shutter speed? I am usually at 1/8 on a tripod for stabilization to let as much light in as i can, am i doing this correctly? I notice people sellers on places like ebay take pictures of their products with backgrounds such as white cloth or acrylic panels. How does it show up to be so white in the photos without overly brightening the product itself? I tried to do the same but had to adjust brightness levels which kills the product's color. Is this from white balance adjustment setting?

@ sleist

Those are some crazy nice pictures! I really hope that i will be able to do shots like those. Are you using some kind of light on your camera?
I am clueless when it comes to lights for camera. I see people have those lights with a cap that evens out the flashes but i have no idea what their purposes is for.

Not all the time, when shooting in lower f numbers the amount you will have in focus will be so small that you will most likely need to do some stacking to get enough in to focus. What I ment was that for some people it can be an important factor, especially if they will use the lens for portraits as well as macro.
Background issue may be solved by having another light source directed at the background only to help brighten it up without blowing the products true colours. From my understanding when people do product shots they use utterly insane amount of light so everything is balanced and bright, but every one has a different technique for everything. I generally point at least 1 flash with a diffuser at the background to help insure it is bright, may work for you may not, I am still learning myself as most people on here are (don't think anyone has stopped learning on here).
Enjoy the Sigma 105 I have no doubt your going to love it.

artemiscables · Oct 7, 2013

I use a crap load of lighting but it's always tinted a different color (either yellow or blue). I will listen to your advice and do some tweaking/adjustments. As for the background, i'll look for a nice diffuser to see if it helps.

Thanks so much everyone, ya'll have been a great help at helping me build a foundation to work on.