Nikon Macro Lenses

[SteveS]

I'm looking at purchasing a macro lens for my D40. I've been looking at the 105mm 2.8 VR. I also noticed that there is a 200mm.
Does anybody have any suggestions as what to look for when buying a macro and has anyone had any experience with the above mentioned?

Thanks
Steve

[Marko]

In terms of buying a macro - we'd first have to know what you want to photograph.....but I have experience with the 105 and it's great as both a portrait and a macro lens.

The 200 has a great reputation but I've not tried it (yet) :) but I've had my eye on this lens for a while so I do know a bit i can share.

The difference between the two will be:
- The 200mm I think only works in manual with the cheaper Nikons and with AF only with the higher end models so be careful, the 105 will work on your D40
-The 200mm will let you do macro at 1:1 FARTHER away from the subject. This makes the subject much easier to light.
-The 200mm is heavier and heftier.
-The 200mm is an F4 lens and not VR (vibration reduction) the 105 is a 2.8 (more or less and it has wobble play on the macro side) VR lens.
-Last i looked the 105mm was around 850. and the 200mm 1700. or so. The 200mm is also hard to find...

Hope that helps,

marko

[SteveS]

Hi Marko

I'll be doing mainly nature shots such as bugs, flowers etc.
Your right! The 200 is tough to find. Its also a little higher priced than I'm willing to pay. I've been reading up on the 105 and it seems like it may the better choice for me.

Steve

[Grant]

I shoot a fair amount with a 105 mm macro. My images are generally in the range of what you want to do. The 105 mm is a magnificent lens and it does put some distance between me and my subject. When I use my film camera I find it to be an ideal lens at an ideal distance. When I shoot digital (half frame) it is idea for small flowers but when I shoot a large flower I find myself so far back that often I am in an adjacent flower bed. The way I shoot the 200 mm would be way to much, I suspect I would have to step back to Toledo to photograph tulips Nova Scotia. If I was buying my first macro for a ½ frame dSLR I would consider the 60 mm as well as the 105 mm but not the 200, unless your wanted close ups of venomous snakes. Don’t forget on a ½ frame dSLR the 60 mm will behave more like a 90 mm and the 105 mm more like a 160 mm and the 200 mm will behave like a 300 mm. The 200 mm will give a lot of distance between you and your subject and a shallower DOF field for the same image size. Believe me there is not much DOF in macro and often you are scratching for it, something to consider.

This is a Siberian Squill I shot a short while ago using a 105 mm macro.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4053/4544211802_ae57f3d047_o.jpg

[Marko]

Thanks for sharing that good info grant :highfive: