Nikon 60mm macro or 85 mm Macro which is better

[raccoon]

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

[matt shepherd]

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.

[raccoon]

Thanks Matt, i was leaning towards the 85mm as it has VR.. do you think that would help..

[djvkool]

VR on macro definetely helps, saves you time from having to worry about setting up the tripod when you see something extraordinary

[matt shepherd]

Shooting ambient light it would definitely help

[davros]

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?

[reaction]

I've heard claims that VR does not help at macro distances. Does anyone know if there's any truth to this?

[ving]

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.

[peterb666]

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.

[salnel]

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

[Blueywa]

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.

[gerry]

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.

[deags]

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?

[reaction]

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

[deags]

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.

[reaction]

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

[occifer nick]

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

[raccoon]

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

[peterb666]

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.

[monsters]

Just a thought, have you look into the Sigma 105mm macro f2.8?