User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Nikon 60mm macro or 85 mm Macro which is better

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Jul 2010
    Location
    Hillsdale
    Posts
    379
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Nikon 60mm macro or 85 mm Macro which is better

    I am looking to buy a Nikon macro lens, which does everyone think is the better lens
    1. AFS 60 Micro F2.8 Ed or
    2. AFS DX Micro 85 F 3.3 Ed VR
    as both are around the same price point
    I have a Nikon D5000

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    01 Mar 2010
    Location
    gold coast
    Posts
    821
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey their I was in the same position about 6 months ago. I ended up with the 60mm and I am extremely happy with it. I cant really comment on the 85mm because I have never tried one but I am sure they are also good.
    I guess it just depends on what you are going to be using this lens for as the 85mm will give you a little more working distance for 1/1 macro. but If you are looking at using it for portraits and so on I think that the 60mm will give you a little better bokeh and better low light performance.
    Hope this helps.

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    07 Jul 2010
    Location
    Hillsdale
    Posts
    379
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Matt, i was leaning towards the 85mm as it has VR.. do you think that would help..

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    19 Mar 2009
    Location
    In the area that used to be a dumping tip!!
    Posts
    46
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    VR on macro definetely helps, saves you time from having to worry about setting up the tripod when you see something extraordinary
    7D | 40D | 24-70L | 70-200L 2.8IS | Tamron 18-270mm | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Sigma 30mm | Canon 50mm 1.8 | 430EXII

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    01 Mar 2010
    Location
    gold coast
    Posts
    821
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Shooting ambient light it would definitely help

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Dec 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    135
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've heard a lot of good things about the Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro, but would anyone put it up against the Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR macro? Worth the extra $150 for a slower lens?

  7. #7
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've heard claims that VR does not help at macro distances. Does anyone know if there's any truth to this?

  8. #8
    Amor fati!
    Join Date
    28 Jun 2007
    Location
    St Helens Park
    Posts
    7,275
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by davros View Post
    I've heard a lot of good things about the Tamron 90mm 2.8 macro, but would anyone put it up against the Nikon 85mm 3.5 VR macro? Worth the extra $150 for a slower lens?
    might be slower but there are a couple of things to consider regarding macro.

    1. shooting macro you generally focus manually.
    2. shooting macro you generally stop down the aperture to get a 1/2 decent DoF (f8 is usually a minimum)


    and so the advantage of f2.8 over f3.5 is negligible... although you might have a slightly brighter viewfinder for focusing (but that is it), unless you use it for normal shooting too then the f2.8 would be better.

  9. #9
    I am older than I look. peterb666's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Oct 2009
    Location
    Tura Beach, NSW
    Posts
    3,607
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you want to play with 60mm, there is also a Tamron 60mm f/2 macro which makes a good short portrait lens on a cropped sensor camera.

    Unless you want to use the lens for dual purposes, then longer and slower is fine. If you are doing hand-held macro (not advisable) then VR and AF are useful. It is a hard call as it is best to take your time but when shooting live subjects, you don't always get the opportunity.

    Longer is better to get a little more working room.

    Choices, choices, choices.

    Oh, the bargain buy is the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 which I think is under $400 grey import. The 60mm f/2 tamron is a little more but not that much.
    Cheers

    PeterB666


    My photo-mojo has gone

    Olympus OM-D E-M5 with Metabones Speed Booster and Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 - almost as insanely wicked as sin itself... but then again, the Voigtlander 10.5mm f/0.95 is kinda fun.

  10. #10
    Member salnel's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 2010
    Location
    Geelong
    Posts
    3,849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I bought the 85mm and I love it...I chose it because it had internal focus, Vr , it is nice and light and I am very happy with the sharpness of my photos..if you want to see some pics, have a look at my 52 challenge as all but one (photo of my dog) have been taken with my macro lens. I am a new to photography and have only had this lens since Xmas so I am still learning. I have used it hand held and the VR really helped but most of the time I am on a tripod and use manual focus but it is handy to have it when a tripod is not possible.
    Hope this helps
    D610 and D90 with a 16-35mm f/4,a 70-200mm f/4 ,a 300mm f/4 +TC11 convertor, 18-200mmDX and 85mm micro Dx.

    Sally...CC always appreciated

    My Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/salnel

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    04 Apr 2010
    Location
    Perth Metro Area
    Posts
    201
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I use the Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 on all of my Nikon bodies and I reckon its a great lens.
    Like any lens it depends what you want to use it for, but for my money there are certainly worse lens out there.
    If youre after a lens that reaches out and grabs your subject from afar then forget it.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    457
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueywa View Post
    I use the Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 on all of my Nikon bodies and I reckon its a great lens.
    Like any lens it depends what you want to use it for, but for my money there are certainly worse lens out there.
    If youre after a lens that reaches out and grabs your subject from afar then forget it.
    thats a good point, remember that the 60mm will require you to be very close when you are getting towards 1:1 mag. sometimes the extra reach is handy to separate yourself from the subject.
    I have a clapped out 55mm and when you get to 1:1 the lens hood is almost touching the subject!

    In terms of the VR, from a macro point of view, i reckon its over rated.

    The tamron 90mm has a very good reputation and if I was going to buy a new macro lens this would definitely be a contender.
    Some Nikon stuff... gerrys photo journey
    https://plus.google.com/+GerardBlacklock
    No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.

  13. #13
    Member deags's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Aug 2010
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was thinking of buying the 60mm micronikkor for my wife as she is starting to get interested in shooting macro. I am interested in how good the lens is for portrait shots as well as I hadn't considered that until looking at this thread. She does do a lot of portrait shooting, mainly for friends new babies and the like.
    Also, peterb666, how is the tamron 60mm macro both portraits and macro? I am guessing from your post it has a slower AF?

  14. #14
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    you'll have to define 'good for portrait shots'
    people have such different ideas
    eg some say soft focus is a must
    or blurry edges
    etc

  15. #15
    Member deags's Avatar
    Join Date
    10 Aug 2010
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    17
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I will have to talk to her about that. Portraits aren't really an interest of mine, I much prefer urban landscape and architecture. Being that most of the subjects she shoots are babies, then I would imagine soft focus would more than likely suit her.

  16. #16
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    also macro AF is slow, but u can limit it to eg 2m-inf.
    depending on the lens the switch will differ, then its AF will be same as nrmal

  17. #17
    Member occifer nick's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 2010
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Paul I have the Nikkor 60mm 2.8d and love it for underwater macro. If you want to borrow it to try then just call me.

    Edit; just saw the post date and assuming you have bought one by now! Lol
    If not you can still give me a buzz and borrow mine haha
    Last edited by occifer nick; 04-09-2011 at 6:27am.
    Regards
    Occifer Nick

    Nikon D7000 | Tokina 11-16/2.8 | Cokin P Series 121M Grad | Nikon 60mm 2.8D | Nauticam NA-D7000V underwater housing |


  18. #18
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    07 Jul 2010
    Location
    Hillsdale
    Posts
    379
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Nick,
    I bought the 85mm but might try out teh 60mm sometime

    let me know what you think of the 70-200
    See ya

  19. #19
    I am older than I look. peterb666's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Oct 2009
    Location
    Tura Beach, NSW
    Posts
    3,607
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deags View Post
    Also, peterb666, how is the tamron 60mm macro both portraits and macro? I am guessing from your post it has a slower AF?
    It does both jobs well but AF in poor light could be better. This is more likely to be an issue in available light portrait work.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    10 May 2011
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just a thought, have you look into the Sigma 105mm macro f2.8?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •