# Good macro lens for NIKON D90?



## Firewing (Nov 9, 2011)

I'm a novice photographer, so I surely don't have enough experience with lenses to make the best choices, yet. =) I want to grab a macro lens, since there are so many small things I'd love to get up close to and capture all the detail of.

AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G


That is what I had mind. Is this a good choice, and might there be anything else out there for a D90 under $280 that could be better for me? Some people recommended different brands and lenses, so I'm here for help since I don't know how to properly compare the wide variety of features each lens has to offer. Any help appreciated, thank you!


----------



## Derrel (Nov 9, 2011)

I cannot figure out exactly why these "short" macro lenses keep hitting the market, except for the fact that the used lens market is FILLED with older, barely-ever-used macro lenses of longer focal lengths, like 90mm and 105mm. TO me, a 40mm macro lens just seems, well, like a dumb idea. But, Pentax came out with a 35mm macro, and Nikon a 40mm macro...I suppose it's for people who want the 60mm "equivalent" for their DX Nikons, in an inexpensive lens that doubles as a semi-normal lens.

I think 40mm is too short for macro- and close-up shooting. Just flat-out, too doggone short for most subjects and most types of situations I can envision. Any small subject you wish to show large, and from close-up will have to be REALLLLLY close to the front of the lens....like a half an inch away to one inch...that means your body will be blocking natural light, AND you'll have one he(( of a time geting electronic flash onto the subject in a normal,conventional manner. AND...this is the bad part...when the flash is mounted on the camera or on a bracket, it is soooooooo close to the subject that light fall-off is a big problem. So is exposure consistency and exposure regulation.

Honestly...I can think of only a couple of special areas where a 40mm macro lens makes any sense for macro/close-up work. If you like to do botanical photos, it makes sense. As a close-range lens, but not as a "macro" lens a 40mm might make sense. I think a used 60mm or used 90mm Tamron or used 105mm Sigma make much more sense. Same with the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro. macro lenses are so commonly bought, shot, and retired, it's ridiculous...just simply ridiculous...I have never bought a brand new macro lens, and I own seven of them. The oldest one was made in 1972, and is a 55mm Nikkor and I bought it for $100, 30 years old and damned near "NEW"...people buy macros, use 'em for three weeks, then...get bored...buy a USED ONE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Firewing (Nov 9, 2011)

Thank you Derrel for all of the helpful information. You pointed out some very interesting things I never took into consideration. One of which is to buy a used lens, for some reason I never thought of that and I think I just might do that now. Some of the ones you mentioned are way out of my price range, so I'm trying to narrow it down, and see what I can get under $280-300. If I find something I'll edit this, also if you come across anything let me know!


----------



## Overread (Nov 9, 2011)

As someone who owns a 35mm macro lens (Tokina) I fully second Derrels points with regard to the very short focal length macro lenses - they are very tricky beasts with regard to focusing and lighting. 

I will add the sigma 70mm into the list Derrel gave of shorter affordable macro lenses as another one to consider.


----------



## Dillard (Nov 9, 2011)

I have a tamron 90mm f2.8 and LOVE it..(I shoot a D90 also)

I know there is always the concern for 3rd part products, but this is a lovely lens. I even feel that sometimes 90mm is short, so i would stay away from much shorter. It is also a reasonably priced lens. Slightly over your budget, although i found a used one from BH for a steal!




Bee Hunting by Dillard Stephens, on Flickr

Straight out of the camera. This lens truly sparked my love for photography


----------



## Nikon_Josh (Nov 9, 2011)

Dillard said:


> I have a tamron 90mm f2.8 and LOVE it..(I shoot a D90 also)
> 
> I know there is always the concern for 3rd part products, but this is a lovely lens. I even feel that sometimes 90mm is short, so i would stay away from much shorter. It is also a reasonably priced lens. Slightly over your budget, although i found a used one from BH for a steal!
> 
> Straight out of the camera. This lens truly sparked my love for photography



I have to agree with Dilliard who has just shown an amazing capture he got, my Tamron 90 2.8 is a lens that simply inspires me!

I've got a decent bee shot that I will add here when I get a chance.

Right on Derrel, I find 90mm is too short sometimes and that is a decent working distance. I would not even touch a 40mm Macro lens! Would be pointless in my eyes.


----------



## Netskimmer (Nov 9, 2011)

What lenses do you have? You may want to consider Extension tubes. They aren't as good as a true 1:1 macro lens but they can give greats results.

This is the set I have:

Amazon.com: Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set DG 12mm, 20mm, and 36mm Tubes for Nikon AF Digital and Film Cameras - AEXRUBEDGC: Camera & Photo


----------



## dsquared (Nov 10, 2011)

Maybe Tokina 100mm ?


----------



## Firewing (Nov 11, 2011)

Still looking around, might have to wait a month or two before I grab one, since it might be kind of expensive. 

I have an old minolta film camera laying around that someone gave to me, too bad the 70-210mm Tokina lens is not compatible with my Nikon D90. Its in great condition.


----------



## TheFantasticG (Nov 11, 2011)

I tried the Tamron 90mm SP Di, Sigma 105mm HSM EX, and Sigma 150 HSM EX macro lenses on the D90. Honestly, I much preferred the Tamron 90mm SP Di (not the SP only) simply for how well it plays with the D90 sensor. It beats the Sigmas in color rendition and IQ. It's shorter, but improve your ninja skills as I did and you'll not have a problem with getting close enough. It'd really be worth your time to save up the money to buy the Tamron 90mm F2.8 SP Di new or used.


----------



## thierry (Nov 16, 2011)

I would def go with the Tammy 90mm I LOVE it! It is super sharp! http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...17145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=B00021EE4U


----------



## ricbkewl (Nov 19, 2011)

AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED


----------



## ricbkewl (Nov 19, 2011)

You're asking for the best, there it is: AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED


----------



## rgribbons (Nov 19, 2011)

I shoot with the tamron 90mm f2.8 as well on a d90 and absolutely love it. Very sharp and crisp. You can't go wrong.


----------



## Nicostorm (Nov 30, 2011)

I just bought a nikon 85mm 3.5 which is stablized. I love it so for. Internal motor so it does extend hardly at all. Lots of working distance. Handheld shots are good with VR.


----------



## prakhardeep (Dec 2, 2011)

Tamron SP 90mm one of the best macro lens in the market. I love it.

It is very sharp and produces excellent macros.


----------



## jake337 (Dec 8, 2011)

You can find a used Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro for around $350usd.  Great lens.  Built like a tank.  9 rounded aperture blades for creamy bokeh.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Dec 8, 2011)

dsquared said:


> Maybe Tokina 100mm ?



Yes!  I have this lens and also shoot with a D90.  LOVE both of them!  GREAT lens!!


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 9, 2011)

If u want to save a lot of cash you should consider a nikon 105mm micro ais (manual focus). The f2.8 cost around $200 used, the f4 can be had for around $130.  The optics on these lenses are fantastic and the build quality is much better then the newer versions (zero plastic!).

You will lose auto focus and light metering, but thats not as big of deal with macro work anyway, since its nearly always done with mf and a strong flash.


----------

