Need advice for budget macro lens for Nikon D5100

[joshinaround]

Hi guys,

I'm relatively a noob at photography and could really use your advice. I shoot jewelry with my Nikon D5100 and I'm looking for a micro/macro lens for around $300 and under (will buy used). I would love to have a longer lens (105mm) because I will be lighting with strobes from front and back and need to get out of the way. According to Best Macro Lenses page, it seems the Nikon 105mm f/2.8 AF-D (Nikon 105mm AF Micro-NIKKOR Review) would be great. Is there a better option? Cheaper? Maybe one where my auto focus would work?

Also, I was wondering if buying a shorter lens and then adding the extension tubes would get the same/close results as a 105mm? Something like a [SIZE=+1]Nikon 55mm f/2.8 AF?[/SIZE]

Please send add links to good buys if you know of them!

I appreciate all your help!

 

[cgipson1]

Most macro is shot in Manual Focus anyway... and since your body lacks a built in focus motor, you would be limited to nikon G lenses (or 3rd party) if you want full autofocus.

I highly recommend the Tokina 100mm 2.8 Macro... it is an excellent lens. Amazon.com: Tokina AF 100mm f/2.8 AT-X M100 Pro D Macro Lens - Nikon Mount: Camera & Photo. You can pick them up used for a little less, but they hold their value very well.. so you won't save much.

The Tamron 90mm macro is another good one... as is the Nikon 85mm DX.

I don't recommend anything less than the 85mm, especially if you want to shoot insects. Shorter focal lengths have to get too close, and scares the bugs. Extension Tubes decrease DOF (Depth of Field) significantly... and sometimes require getting closer to the subject, which again... scares them.

Shot with Nikon 85mm on Nikon D7000 (cropped)


Shot with Tokina 100mm on Nikon D7000

 

[goodguy]

Great question, I have been thinking about which lens to buy, Macro lens or the 85mm 1.8D for general use and portrait.
I tried Nikon 60mm 2.8G and was blown away about how sharp it was when doing macro.
what blew me away even more was how good it was for portrait, almost as good as the 85mm 1.8G.
Problem its over my current budget and then I found the Nikon 60mm 2.8D has basically same optics minus focusing motor.
So I am seriously considering getting this lens.
On your camera it will work with manual focusing only.
You can get it for under 300$

I guess this is one of these cases where the D7000 and D7100 internal focus motor comes in handy.

 

[goodguy]

Actually another option is the Nikon 40mm Macro 2.8G DX
Didnt try it and while it probably aint the lens to shoots yakky bugs I think for jewlery you can get as close as you want, I dont think rings and necklesses will run away screeming from the big scary lens you aiming at it.
A new one is exactly 300$

NIKON AF-S DX MICRO 40MM F2.8G LENS 2200

 

[cgipson1]

Actually another option is the Nikon 40mm Macro 2.8G DX
Didnt try it and while it probably aint the lens to shoots yakky bugs I think for jewlery you can get as close as you want, I dont think rings and necklesses will run away screeming from the big scary lens you aiming at it.
A new one is exactly 300$

NIKON AF-S DX MICRO 40MM F2.8G LENS 2200

The other BIG disadvantage is trying to light macro subjects with a short focal length macro lens! Unless you have specialized macro lighting (expensive, more than many lenses!)... it is very difficult to light objects when the lens is only an inch or two away from them. The OP actually mentions this in the Original Post.

And I think you mean NECKLACES and SCREAMING (and i won't touch the poor grammar!) lol!

ANY Macro lens is going to be SHARP.. it is part of being a macro lens! Using a macro lens for portraiture, while feasible... can be very finicky to focus properly... the focusing mechanism is designed for close subjects. A macro lens will not do portraiture as well / easy as a dedicated portrait type lens!

 

[Derrel]

Anything macro lens 90mm or longer....Tamron, Tokina, Sigma, Nikon. Whatever. All of them are fine to excellent.

 

[joshinaround]

cgipson1, I appreciate the feedback. It seems this Amazon.com: Tokina AF 100mm f/2.8 AT-X M100 Pro D Macro Lens - Nikon Mount: Camera & Photo may be slightly over my budget, but I'll surf around to try to find a used one at $300.

I found some used Tamron 90mm macro's for around $300 here: Amazon.com: Buying Choices: Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP A/M 1:1 Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras (Model 272EE)
The Nikon 85mm DX, seems to be over $400 and for that matter, I'd prefer to have a lens over 100mm.



Goodguy, I also appreciate your feedback.

I think you successfully talked me out of the extension tubes, I wouldn't want to sacrifice the depth of field. I'm trying to duplicate a set up I found here: Simple Jewelry Photography Using 2 Lights | Jewelry Photography Blog . I've found that I need to back my camera up as it's getting in the way of the light, so I believe I must at least 100mm lens.


Please keep the suggestions coming!

 

[joshinaround]

While we're at it....

As I mentioned, I'm trying to duplicate this tutorials results: Simple Jewelry Photography Using 2 Lights | Jewelry Photography Blog

Here are my results thus far with the kit 18-55mm lens and close up lens attachment and only 1 strobe from rear:



As you can see, I have a ways to go to make mine like the tutorials example. I imagine I'd need a real marco lens, I just cannot seem to focus very well on the smallest gems in my example. Would you say that's my problem? Also, I'll be buying another strobe to light from the from. I'm getting there!

Again, I'd appreciate any advice here! I'm new at this and willing to learn!

Thank you.

 

[cgipson1]

Definitely macro lens subjects... and if you light from the rear, make a oversized shoot through reflector out of white cardboard for foam (just cut a lens sized hole in it). Leave it long on both sides and top.. and you can manipulate the light quite a bit by moving the sides and top around. Also get some black material to use as flags to subtract light from where you don't want it.

you might try this book... Light Science and Magic: An Introduction to Photographic Lighting: Fil Hunter, Steven Biver, Paul Fuqua: 9780240812250: Amazon.com: Books

 

[joshinaround]

Cgipson1, thank you again! I will look into these techniques and book.


May I run a few lens past you guys and see if one of these may work? So far the suggested lens have either been too short or out of my budget.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-70-300m...TF8&qid=1380488194&sr=1-1&keywords=macro+lens

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di LD Macro Zoom Lens with Built In Motor for Nikon Digital SLR (Model A17NII): TAMRON: Camera & Photo

Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

For some reason, I feel I'm off on the wrong track with these, but the price is right!



If these don't work, so far I'm leaning towards the Nikon 105mm AF Micro-NIKKOR Review if i can find one close to $300.

Thank you again!

 

[cgipson1]

Cgipson1, thank you again! I will look into these techniques and book.


May I run a few lens past you guys and see if one of these may work? So far the suggested lens have either been too short or out of my budget.

Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 SLD DG Macro Lens with built in motor for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 Di LD Macro Zoom Lens with Built In Motor for Nikon Digital SLR (Model A17NII): TAMRON: Camera & Photo

Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

For some reason, I feel I'm off on the wrong track with these, but the price is right!



If these don't work, so far I'm leaning towards the Nikon 105mm AF Micro-NIKKOR Review if i can find one close to $300.

Thank you again!

Those are NOT macro lenses... they are zooms with a limited (sort-of) macro function. Usually if you are lucky these will do half life size (1:2) or a third life size (1:3). For jewelry, you really want life-size (1:1 or greater)

Low cost third party lenses are usually worse then the low cost kit lenses that are sold with the cameras... lower IQ, soft corners, slower focusing, etc....

 

[joshinaround]

Ok, that's what I thought. I was lured in with them posting "macro" in the titles. So do you like that Nikon 105?

 

[cgipson1]

Ok, that's what I thought. I was lured in with them posting "macro" in the titles. So do you like that Nikon 105?

I love it! It is my favorite macro lens to date! Razor sharp, and excellent IQ. I did own the Tokina 100 prior to that, as well as others. The Tokina is my second favorite!

I keep hoping Nikon will update the 200mm they make, then I might buy one.

 

[goodguy]

Actually another option is the Nikon 40mm Macro 2.8G DX
Didnt try it and while it probably aint the lens to shoots yakky bugs I think for jewlery you can get as close as you want, I dont think rings and necklesses will run away screeming from the big scary lens you aiming at it.
A new one is exactly 300$

NIKON AF-S DX MICRO 40MM F2.8G LENS 2200

The other BIG disadvantage is trying to light macro subjects with a short focal length macro lens! Unless you have specialized macro lighting (expensive, more than many lenses!)... it is very difficult to light objects when the lens is only an inch or two away from them. The OP actually mentions this in the Original Post.

And I think you mean NECKLACES and SCREAMING (and i won't touch the poor grammar!) lol!

ANY Macro lens is going to be SHARP.. it is part of being a macro lens! Using a macro lens for portraiture, while feasible... can be very finicky to focus properly... the focusing mechanism is designed for close subjects. A macro lens will not do portraiture as well / easy as a dedicated portrait type lens!

And yet I have learned another new thing which of course makes perfect sense.
Didnt think of the flash issue.

Thank you for taking the time to fix my English.
English is my second language so no matter how many year I live in Canada and how much I will speek english and how much I read and write it will never come naturally as my mother tongue.

As for a macro not being a perfect portrait lens, well I know that but still from my test the 60mm 2.8G blew away my 50mm 1.8G out of the water as a portrait lens.

 

[cgipson1]

Actually another option is the Nikon 40mm Macro 2.8G DX
Didnt try it and while it probably aint the lens to shoots yakky bugs I think for jewlery you can get as close as you want, I dont think rings and necklesses will run away screeming from the big scary lens you aiming at it.
A new one is exactly 300$

NIKON AF-S DX MICRO 40MM F2.8G LENS 2200

The other BIG disadvantage is trying to light macro subjects with a short focal length macro lens! Unless you have specialized macro lighting (expensive, more than many lenses!)... it is very difficult to light objects when the lens is only an inch or two away from them. The OP actually mentions this in the Original Post.

And I think you mean NECKLACES and SCREAMING (and i won't touch the poor grammar!) lol!

ANY Macro lens is going to be SHARP.. it is part of being a macro lens! Using a macro lens for portraiture, while feasible... can be very finicky to focus properly... the focusing mechanism is designed for close subjects. A macro lens will not do portraiture as well / easy as a dedicated portrait type lens!

And yet I have learned another new thing which of course makes perfect sense.
Didnt think of the flash issue.

Thank you for taking the time to fix my English.
English is my second language so no matter how many year I live in Canada and how much I will speek english and how much I read and write it will never come naturally as my mother tongue.

As for a macro not being a perfect portrait lens, well I know that but still from my test the 60mm 2.8G blew away my 50mm 1.8G out of the water as a portrait lens.

I apologize.. I did not know that English was your second language! I will try to remember not to "Razz" you about your spelling in the future! I try to only tease native English speakers... they should know better!