p.1 #1 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
I've heard nothing but good things about this lens optically, I know it's a D series (screw drive and I'm guessing heavier) lens but that doesn't bother me and I'm current shooting on my D800E so that's a wash in my books.
My question, how dose this lens stack up against the Nikon/Tamron F4 equivalents? Anyone still shoot with this lens? If so please post some samples at the short and long ends.
I have the Nikon 60mm F2.8D and the Sigma 150 OS Macro lenses, and for portraits I have my Sigma Art 105mm F1.4, so this would be my mid-range zoom.
p.1 #2 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
I owned that lens several years ago.
Very sharp, and the zoom capability, combined with the tripod collar, was helpful to optimize framing when working on tripod.
However ... working distance was too short. Not better than a 90-105 macro lens. Probably worse. For two reasons: the barrel is rather long and the effective focal length at the long end and close distances was 71 mm (just) !! (see http://www.pierretoscani.com/objectifs-a.html#objectifs-a-04-01).
Focal length shortening (aka focus breathing) implies also that the separation of the subject from the background was not optimal.
Therefore, I sold it, because taking pictures like the attached one (frog, Rana italica) was very difficult.
At present, I own 3 macro lenses: AF-S ED 105 VR, AF ED Micro-Nikkor 200/4 & Zeiss ZF 100/2 Makro-Planar.
The 200/4 is by far the best for subject isolation and shy critters. 105 VR is versatile (fast, VR, etc.), and very good for portraiture. The Zeiss is optically excellent, but I tend to use it on tripod and focus by LiveView.
gnet158 wrote:
... this would be my mid-range zoom.
Thanks!
I used it as a telezoom, but it was rather slow (f/4.5-5.6).
I prefer my current AF-S 70-200/4 VR; fixed f/4 aperture, faster AF & VR.
p.1 #3 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
I've owned two copies of that lens. Sold the first to try something else, regretted it, and bought the second. Unfortunately I'm not subscribed to upload and sell, so I can't post any images. The lens is sharp! Not quite as sharp as the Sigma 150, (when the 150 focuses correctly, which is not all the time like the 70-180), but dam good enough. When I first purchased the lens I was shooting DX. After buying an FX camera i did find the working distance to be a little short. Ultimately my second copy of the lens developed some play in the barrel, which resulted in a torn circuit board. Nikon could not repair it, so I had a local repair shop tighten up the loose barrel and sold it as a manual focus only lens. My interest is in wildlife, so I do need autofocus in many situations. The lack of available parts, short working distance, and my recent acquisition of a Z6 (which can't af screw-drive lenses) caused me to replace the 70-180 with the Sigma 150 OS macro, which is a great lens, but not without its issues. I'd love to see Nikon redesign this as a Z mount lens, with just a little longer focal length and all the current bells and whistles, but with the shrinking market for real cameras and lenses I doubt we'll see many special purpose lenses like that anymore.
p.1 #7 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
I've never owned any of the f4 variants.
However, everything I've read says the performance of the Nikon 70-200 f4 is very close if not equal to the 70-200 f2.8G II (which I use). If that's the case, I'd say overall sharpness as a regular zoom the f4 wins out for sure.
However, for macro shots of stuff that does not run away, I still use and enjoy the 70-180. Until something else comes along that's similar (but shortens focal length less close up) I'll probably just keep mine and continue to use it. The 180mm focal length is misleading with respect to how long it is at close focus. If I go out without any intentions of shooting macros, the 70-180 usually stays home.
p.1 #8 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
gnet158 wrote:
My question, how dose this lens stack up against the Nikon/Tamron F4 equivalents?
A reasonably good alternative to 70-180 macro is the AF-S 70-200/4 VR + Canon 500D combo.
The Canon 500D is a quite good close-up attachment lens (it's an achromatic doublet) specifically designed to work with telephoto lenses.
The Canon 500D filter (500 mm focal length) allows to transform a 70-200 telezoom in a telemacro zoom.
Maximum magnification is 0,818 X (1:1.2) at the long end & 1 m minimum focusing distance (mfd).
However, the quality at 200mm & mfd suffers a little bit.
With the zoom focused at infinity, magnification is FL/500, where FL is the set focal length of the zoom. At 200 mm, magnification is 0.4 X (1:2.5) and quality is good.
On crop bodies (APS-C) the quality is uniform across the frame.
Here is an example (FL = 155 mm):
p.1 #9 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
Notwithstanding its deficiencies, the 70-180 still ranks today as a unique lens. I continue to use my copy on the D850. No other macro IME gives you the ability to frame the scene by zooming. The 55 f2.8's, 60 f2.8G and 105 f2.8G may be sharper but in practice this is negligible for the framing advantages - for snakes especially. Tamron's macros are good value, and so are Sigma's. But I sold on my 180 f2.8APO. The latter Sigma is a stunning optic, yet it weighs more than a 500 PF. It was yet more to lug with telephotos etc on flights for the 'just in case' events.
Yes, there is the focus-breathing and the AF crawls to & fro at testudine speed but I often shoot MF anyways (one has to on the Z7 because of zilch AFD support). The too small tripod collar is also rather feeble. (Not the first time Nikon have failed here?!?) I reinforced mine by carefully drilling and tapping into 2 by 2.5mm SS capscrews to strengthen / stiffen the neck and fix on an arca-swiss plate - permanently with epoxy.
Grays in London used to regularly have a couple of Mint lenses in their Used catalogue, albeit at a lofty price, but not seen one there for months... It's now many years since Nikon dropped out, but it seems to be scarcer than ever.
Regrettable that this Nikkor fell away. Sadly this unique zoom has not been upgraded this to an E Nikkor with the new coatings and a robust tripod collar; if this new model ever arises, all the better if it's made detaching, as then Kirk, RRS could have rescued Nikon from their R&D folly- yet again ;-)
p.1 #10 · Nikon 70-180mm Macro vs Nikon/Tamron F4 lenses
Thanks for the replies, the reason I asked is currently I do not have a mid-range zoom and have always wanted to try this lens. And I’m finding good looking copies in the sub $700 USD range.
Glad to know some still treasure this lens. 