I've very recently purchased my first DSLR Camera, a Nikon D5300.
I'm interested in doing a bit of macro photography, but I cannot quite afford new $600+ macro lenses which are said to be excellent.
Now, I've been very interested in older "vintage" lenses for a while. I understand that some models are very good, and only cost a fraction of what new lenses go for.
So far, I've been eyeing a Nikkor AF 105mm f2.8 (Approx 1990-2006), which is supposedly excellent and goes for only about $250.
My question to all of you:
Are there any other vintage macro lens worth looking at? I'm mostly interested in ~100mm sized lenses, but can look at other sizes if they are good enough options.
Maybe other old macro lens from third party manufacturers? I have only researched Nikon brand lenses so far, and would love some opinions
P1kas wrote:
[...]
I've very recently purchased my first DSLR Camera, a Nikon D5300.
[...]
So far, I've been eyeing a Nikkor AF 105mm f2.8 (Approx 1990-2006), which is supposedly excellent and goes for only about $250.
AFAIK, the D5300 does not have a screw drive, and so will not work (autofocus) with the AF 105mm lens. If you can live without autofocus, and many can with macro, then you're good to go.
You will end up using the lens for non-macro purposes as well, and there won't be autofocus - but one can do a decent job manually with non- or slow-moving subjects.
The focal length is good; going much shorter gets frustrating quickly re: lighting, because the working lengths get really short.
Nov 16, 2017 at 06:12 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
hi, you may get more responses if you post your question in the macro world forum.
there are quite a few older 3-party macro lenses which are quite good. the folks in the macro forum will be able to help. also, there are threads in that forum which contain photos of people's macro setup as well.
The modern 105mm f/2.8G VR sells used for $500-550 all day. That seems like an obvious choice if you really need that long of a lens. On a crop body, the 60mm f/2.8G would be another good choice and also inside your budget.
I have the Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR that I bought used on ebay. It is excellent. If there was a better macro lens, I would have it. I see completed sales on ebay for $480--$625. This is deep into no-brainer territory.
I made a mistake before, and did not mention my actual budget: $300.
@kaplah The lack of autofocus is something I am aware of, and I believe I can live without. If I ever end up needing to shoot more dynamic moving targets, then my 18-55 kit lens will "do the job".
I understand that these macro lenses can also be pretty good for portrait pictures? What about landscapes?
Andre: Is that a Nikon brand lens? I haven't researched that one in particular. Do you think it might be better than the old but sharp 55mm f3.5 micro from the 60s-70s?
I should mention that the reason I mention the AF model over the(cheaper, but still very sharp) AI and AI-S versions of the 105mm f2.8 is because that particular lens does allow for metering on my camera model, and it can achieve 1:1 magnification without any extension tubes.
I scored a near-mint Pentax Takumar 100mm f/4 Macro (M42 screw mount) for just over $100.
I use it on my EOS system cameras with a $10-20 adapter, depending on whether you want the focus confirmation chip or not. Could just as easily be adapted to Nikon-F mount.
You really don't want or need AF on a macro lens, because every time you turn the focus ring, you're changing the magnificaton ratio. I'll typically set the desired magnification, then move the entire camera/lens assembly in and out, nearer to or further from the subject, until the subject is properly focused. A focusing rail is convenient for this purpose.
It needs a screw drive to AF so it will be manual only on your body, but if you ever upgrade its AF. MF for macro is not a huge deal especially if budget is a concern. It is a telescoping lens, which is +/-, but does mean that the aperture is consistent throughout the focus range, unlike some more modern, fixed-length designs (like the Nikon 60^ and 105 VR )
I'm still new to this whole thing, so excuse my potentially simple questions.
I understand that Aperture affects Depth of Field, but I did not know that focus rings on some lens also change the aperture.
So on some lens, my aperture is limited by my current focus setting?
For example:
I am focused on my subject at the closest possible distance allowed by my lens. Can't I freely change my aperture to manipulate depth of field without losing focus? I understand that too wide an aperture at super close ranges would result in a blurry mess, but don't quite understand how focus relates to aperture in lens that do not maintain constant aperture throughout the focus range.
I can't even seem to formulate my question coherently 😕
@cope07
I recommend a Nikkor AI/AIS 105/4 micro if that's your desired FL, and they're available all day on eBay for $150. On DX, the 55mm micros might be more suitable, and are cheaper. Ask in the manual-focus thread in this Nikon forum. I focus my AF macro/micro lenses by hand, or move the subject if shooting in the studio.
I've considered the AI versions, but I think I'd still lean towards the AF/AF-D versions because the camera can "recognize" the lens for exif data, and also perform some "metering" for automatic exposure settings(Useful for when I'll be shooting in non macro situations.) The manual focus AI versions also seem to require an extension tube to reach a 1:1 magnification ratio, while the AF/AF-D versions do not.
I'm not aware of any lenses on which the aperture changes as you focus. As you ZOOM and change the focal length, sure. But I'm unaware of any relationship between aperture and focus distance.
I suppose I was confused by part of a stament in a reply by another poster:
"It is a telescoping lens, which is +/-, but does mean that the aperture is consistent throughout the focus range, unlike some more modern, fixed-length designs (like the Nikon 60^ and 105 VR )"
Does the above statement not imply that in these modern lens focus range has an effect on aperture?
bthebert wrote:
I'm not aware of any lenses on which the aperture changes as you focus. As you ZOOM and change the focal length, sure. But I'm unaware of any relationship between aperture and focus distance.
There is, but the effect is usually tiny. I think someone is using "aperture" and "f-stop" interchangeably here, which is a mistake. The physical diameter of the "hole" the light goes through doesn't change of course, but the f-stop does change with focus. Remember that f-stop is a RATIO, it's the ratio of aperture divided by focal length. When you focus a lens closer, you are lengthening it a bit. The ratio changes as you do. Normally this is very slight but with macro you have to lengthen the lens considerably more to get focus on something inches away. This changes the ratio, of course. In the past (~100 years ago) all photographers knew this because they were shooting large format. You have to calculate the effect of lengthening the bellows will have on exposure--this is called "bellows factor." Anyone who owns a macro lens has no doubt noticed that as you focus closer the lens' tube gets extended further and further out. Modern cameras with TTL metering take this into account when coming up with an exposure.
As for a good and less expensive macro around 100mm, I suggest the Tamron 90mm macro.
For the 100mm range with macro lenses, you can't go wrong the Nikon 105mm f2.8, Tokina 100mm, Tamron 90mm, all excellent. Manual focus is preferred by many for static subjects with macro work, but it's nice to have AF as an option when using the lens for more general purpose. I'm not currently up on used prices, but I believe you should be able to get any of those mentioned for $300 or under, depending on condition.
If you were receptive to AIS or had a larger budget I'd have other suggestions as well, but these three are solid for that focal length.
P1kas wrote:
I'm still new to this whole thing, so excuse my potentially simple questions.
I understand that Aperture affects Depth of Field, but I did not know that focus rings on some lens also change the aperture.
So on some lens, my aperture is limited by my current focus setting?
For example:
I am focused on my subject at the closest possible distance allowed by my lens. Can't I freely change my aperture to manipulate depth of field without losing focus? I understand that too wide an aperture at super close ranges would result in a blurry mess, but don't quite understand how focus relates to aperture in lens that do not maintain constant aperture throughout the focus range.
The effective aperture changes on most macro lenses as you near the minimum focus distance. For example my Tamron 60mm f2 is only f2 near infinity. At about 2.5m effective aperture changes to f2.2 and at minimum focus distance it is f4. At macro distances this is not a big issue as you usually want to stop down to achieve optimal depth of field anyway.
There are really no bad macro's on the market so just grab one in your price range and go for it
If there was a better macro lens, I would have it. I see completed sales on ebay for $480--$625. This is deep into no-brainer territory.