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
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
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.
Thanks Matt, i was leaning towards the 85mm as it has VR.. do you think that would help..
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
Shooting ambient light it would definitely help
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?
I've heard claims that VR does not help at macro distances. Does anyone know if there's any truth to this?
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.
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
Olympus Pen F with Metabones Speed Booster and Laowa 12mm f/2.8 or Voigtlander 10.5mm f/0.95 or Nikon D800 with the Laowa 12mm f/2.8. The need to keep in touch with the past is a Nikon Photomic FTn or Nikon F2A and a Nikkor 25-50mm f/4 AI
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
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.
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?
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
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.
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
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
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
Just a thought, have you look into the Sigma 105mm macro f2.8?