44lefty wrote:
The 105 is really terrific. I can't think why I might want VR.

Larry


VR for micro work is kind of useless. Tripods are key.

Andre Labonte wrote:
44lefty wrote:
The 105 is really terrific. I can't think why I might want VR.

Larry


VR for micro work is kind of useless. Tripods are key.

Tripods are certainly the key to eliminatnig camera vibration in mzacrophotography, especially. Even more effective is the use of tripod coupled with off-camera flash to eliminate subject motion (such as flowers on a cloudy, breezy day).

Larry

Jammy Straub wrote:
If price is no object the ZF 100 f/2 is the way I'd go. You get 1:1 with a small tube and f/2 for ease of focusing and portrait DOF. I love love love the way that lens paints.


Or, if you don't near the reach of the100mm lens, the Zeiss ZF 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar.

Lotusm50 wrote:
Jammy Straub wrote:
If price is no object the ZF 100 f/2 is the way I'd go. You get 1:1 with a small tube and f/2 for ease of focusing and portrait DOF. I love love love the way that lens paints.


Or, if you don't near the reach of the100mm lens, the Zeiss ZF 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar.





Either of those look like great lenses, but they have break the bank prices. I think there are cheeper alternatives that work just as well.

brinnonbob wrote:
Yet another vote for the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 Macro! And be sure to get the Sigma 1.4X TC to go along with it. Actual working distance is approx. 8 inches in front of the lens. Plenty of space for flash use without lens shadows.


X2

Andre Labonte wrote:
Lotusm50 wrote:
Jammy Straub wrote:
If price is no object the ZF 100 f/2 is the way I'd go. You get 1:1 with a small tube and f/2 for ease of focusing and portrait DOF. I love love love the way that lens paints.


Or, if you don't near the reach of the100mm lens, the Zeiss ZF 50mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar.



Either of those look like great lenses, but they have break the bank prices. I think there are cheeper alternatives that work just as well.



The ZFs cost $1033 (50 MP) and $1450 (100 MP). Not really break the bank prices, and only a bit more than the Nikon lens mentioned here -- the 105/2.8 VR is $900-1000 (depending where you shop). As with most things, we get what you pay for.

if you want you can get Tokina 100mm macro....
I have one with some tubes it makes very nice pictures.

you can find one at fleabay for 350.00 or so - not much in used section all new.

firewireguy wrote:
another vote for the Sigma 150. Amazing lens. Love it

....and another.

André,

I voted for the new 60/2.8 as well as the 105 VR, for both DX and FX.

The 60 is the sharpest lens I have ever used, period (and I have owned both the Zeiss 50/2 and 100/2 macros). The VR is really useful shooting products quickly, too (becomes 150 on DX as you know; very handy focal length). I know you write above that macro photography *should* be shot off a tripod, but if you are doing product work (like food) small camera movements are very time-consuming. I can get perfect results with the 105 VR on the D700, shooting at ƒ8 of ƒ11, handheld, and using a decent shutter speed under tungsten lights, with Auto ISO set to 6400.

Now, I am not sure which DX body you are putting these lenses on, but the 60 on DX is very close to the 105 on FX in terms of FOV, and you can get away with slower shutter speeds.

I do like the sound of the Sigma; I will look into that.

hth, kl

I

I looked up the 105 macro VR on B&H, and it's listed somewhere around $800. (sorry, didn't write it down). You could take a look at KEH for the older lens (used).

Larry

firewireguy wrote:
another vote for the Sigma 150. Amazing lens. Love it

+1 for the Sigma 150. Truly amazing.

Cannot beat the colors of the 105VR. Very good IQ as well.
D700 and 105