# BEST MACRO LENS FOR NIKON D80?



## anouk15 (Jan 28, 2008)

is the nikon 105mm vr macro absolutly required if i want to do good macro without a tripod?Anyone tryed the Tamron 90 mm macro or the Sigma 105 mm macro?
thanks
Anouk


----------



## domromer (Jan 28, 2008)

I've got a sigma 105mm on the way in the mail. I've heard a lot of good things about it. Check out the reviews at pixel peeper. 

I had old version for my Canon and it seemed to work well. I think it's almost half the price of the nikon(micro)


----------



## Stranger (Jan 29, 2008)

I heard the Nikon 105VR Is the best....

Unless you grab the non-VR version which is supposed to have better optics


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 29, 2008)

I own the Sigma 105mm F/2.8 macro, and am very pleased with it's macro capabilities.

What it looks like on my camera:







This is a crop of a memory chip using ambient light.  At 100% its a lot bigger and still just as clear.


----------



## ranmyaku (Jan 29, 2008)

I have the 105 VR Nikkor and it was one of the best investments i have made in a lens. Well worth the money. Think it was around 750 from b&h


----------



## sabbath999 (Jan 29, 2008)

I have the 105 VR and it is a fantastic lens optically. If I had to do it all over again, I would buy the non-VR version, I have used them both and they are optically just about the same. The focusing is better on a D80 with the older non-VR version (the VR version REALLY hunts on a D80 and D40), but then again autofocus is something that isn't that important to me on a macro, since I normally manually focus anyway.

The VR isn't that important either on Macro, since it doesn't work well on Macro subjects. 

On my D300, it the VR version does not hunt AT ALL. It is dead on accurate on autofocus.

Optically, the 105 VR is EXTREMELY sharp, it is the sharpest lens I own.

Then again, for $700 it SHOULD be sharp.

I prefer the 105 length over the 60's because I shoot a lot of bugs, and bugs like their space...


----------



## sabbath999 (Jan 29, 2008)

BTW another huge advantage of the Nikon over the Sigma (as you can see in the photo) is that the Nikon doesn't extend. It is rated as a 2.8, but in truth it is variable aperture at different focal lengths. Since I virtually always shoot at a high aperture to increase my depth of field, this doesn't matter to me.

The 105 also makes an extremely good focal length for portraits, for those people who don't want to be "crowded" by the photographer. I use it and my 50mm for that.


----------



## BHupp (Jan 29, 2008)

I have been using the AF Micro 60 mm 2.8D Nikon lens for a few years now and have received great result. I attached a photo I took just recently. It was shot at 1/80 sec. F-10. 
The one thing I would suggest is, what do you feel you will be using the Micro lens for? This photo is of a stationary subject that will not crawl, leap or fly away. The longer lenses have an advantage when getting close to living subject.

Hope the resolution of the image is good enough, it's my first time at uploading a image to the forum being a NuBe.


----------



## sabbath999 (Jan 29, 2008)

It's funny how some things resemble other things... I have no idea what BHupp's picture is of, but it looks like a part of a Warhammer Orc model.


----------



## BHupp (Jan 29, 2008)

My photo is a glass cast gas cap off a full size replica Harley made from kiln cast and blown glass. The artists name is Joe Stanaway. You can take a look at it at this link. 
www.joestanaway.com


----------

