suggestions for macro lens?

[ironsidephoto]

i'm looking to buy a dedicated macro lens (zoom or not, can't decide.). i have a D200, but i don't really care if it's a nikon lens (read "i don't have the money for a nikon lens). sigma and tamron are fine with me. any suggestions?

 

[JIP]

I really think it depends on your budget this might work http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/341927-USA/Sigma_346306_50mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html but honestly it all depends on how mch you want to spend.

 

[Garbz]

Get your hands on the second hand MicroNikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF D. Since the AF-S G model of this lens has come out the old AF D model can be found for a bargin, and the glass is fantastic.

Focus is a tad slower but then the AF-S model can't keep up with macro hand held shooting either, and the lack of VR is a pity, but then again you're not paying $1800AU for it either.

 

[ironsidephoto]

i'm looking to spend less than $500. it's going to be used ona trip to costa rica (rainforest = bugs and plants and stuff like that) if that helps. i have a 70-300 sigma and a 28-80 tamron. any other suggestions for a trip like that? i'd like a lens or two with a max ap of 2.8 or less.

 

[digital flower]

I love my 60mm Micro-Nikkor and it is in your price range. Works as a nice walk around lens too. Not that great for insects but for flowers and other non-movable objects it is great.

 

[Garbz]

Just a followup, got my lens (the one I suggested) second hand for a bargain price of $500AU ($400US at the time). You'd probably get it around $500US maybe cheaper depending on where you look and the condition, and it http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/nikkor_105_28/index.htm has far better build quality than the Sigma and Tamron offerings, although in the end optical performance is very similar on all the Macros reviewed on that site.

Go through the list there's example prices (err ads) on that website too at the bottom of each review which will give you an idea of what you're up against. Also pay attention to reproduction ratios. A few lenses marked Micro or Macro do not actually offer a 1:1 reproduction ratio.

 

[sabbath999]

Get your hands on the second hand MicroNikkor 105mm f/2.8 AF D. Since the AF-S G model of this lens has come out the old AF D model can be found for a bargin, and the glass is fantastic.

Focus is a tad slower but then the AF-S model can't keep up with macro hand held shooting either, and the lack of VR is a pity, but then again you're not paying $1800AU for it either.

I agree, I have the VR model and frankly the VR doesn't work well in macro mode. It is nice when using the lens as a prime telephoto, but if you are just wanting a macro, the AF-D is an excellent choice (and very reasonably priced used). Sharp, sharp, sharp lens.

 

[Helen B]

Though it doesn't fit your requirement of a maximum aperture of f/2.8, you might also consider the cheaper manual focus 105 mm f/4 Micro-Nikkor. You can get those for less than $200, and they are optically very good - on a DX-sized sensor the performance wide open is excellent. It has a fixed focal length, unlike the 60 mm AF and the 105 mm AF-Micro-Nikkors. The 105 mm f/2.8 AF decreases in focal length as you focus more closely, so it ends up as a 60 mm lens.

Best,
Helen

 

[ironsidephoto]

thanks for the help. it'll be used on both/either a nikon D200 and N6006 (35mm).

a side note, i'm a poor college student and am going to buy non-nikon glass whenever there is a comparable (and cheaper) other brand lens around. i've used nikon, sigma, and tamron, and haven't been disappointed with any of them. my sigma 70-300 actually has a macro setting on it, and i've gotten some great shots out of it. I just don't want to have to zoom in to 200mm to use the thing, giving animals the opportunity to run away

 

[Johnboy2978]

Sigma's 70mm macro lens comes in at around $429 USD. It's a really nice sharp lens that I've been rather happy with.