Nikon D5100, best close up lenses?

secuono · Dec 13, 2012

Like it say's above, what would be the best macro, real close to subject, lenses or kits?
I have a "Polaroid Optics 52mm 4 Piece Close Up Filter Set" that I sometimes use on my lens.
Photos below do not have this kit on the lens. But I'd like to get closer and more detail, possible?

These are 1cm diameter flowers.

4-5in away from Gray Tree Frog [1.5-2in length].

These were taken with the kit.

snowbear · Dec 13, 2012

Some feel that the 105mm Micro Nikkor is the one against which all others are judged (Nikon refers to their macro lenses as "micro".) The longer macro lenses will give you more working distance.

As for what is possible, here's a good example, though Sparky uses a special rig: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/macro-photography/289651-uber-whatsit-97-a.html

TheLost · Dec 14, 2012

+1 to the 105mm Nikon Micro.

I'm a big fan of being cheap... So, i'm also a fan of the ol' "reverse mounting 50mm" trick! I would recommend googling "reverse mount 50mm nikon" for some samples and a how to do it.

cgipson1 · Dec 14, 2012

The Tokina 100 Macro is very well thought off... and an excellent lens. I have owned one, and it is the lens I usually recommend to those starting out in macro.

The Tamron 90 is nice also... as is the Nikon 85mm DX macro.

The Nikon 105 is an awesome lens (currently using that) but it is not cheap. Over twice the price of the Tokina.

Any screw on filter like you are currently using will usually cause severe image degradation.... loss of IQ.... not recommended. The only item like that I recommend is the Raynox DCR-250... it has a good quality glass lens, and works very well.

It all depends on what you want to spend... and what quality you want.

Lighting is also a big part of macro... Diffused flash seems to give some of the best results for the majority of people.

You are welcome to check out the macro shots on my Flickr if you would like to see results from the Nikon 105, Tokina 100 and the Nikon 85. There are also some shots with the Raynox I mentioned.

invisible · Dec 14, 2012

I think that the OP refers to close-up lenses, not dedicated macro lenses.

Close-up lenses are a good alternative to dedicated macro lenses, but they won't give you 1x magnification. As far as I know, the best close-up lenses out there are the Canon 500D and 250D (you'd need to use one or the other, depending on the focal length of your lens). I used the 500D on two different lenses (a Nikon and a Tamron) and it was optically amazing, with barely any degradation, if any. See some info here: Getting Up Close with Close-Up Lenses

As happy as I was with the 500D (so much that I bought one, sold it, and bought it again because I missed it), I am now shooting with a dedicated macro lens. There are very affordable dedicated macro lenses out there that will outperform close-up lenses every time. I can personally recommend the Tamron 90mm excellent lens, and super value for the money. I've also heard great things about the Tokina 100mm but I've never tried it.

Good luck.

secuono · Dec 14, 2012

I'm fairly poor and only do this for personal entertainment, I guess you could say. So $400-1k lenses are probably never going to be something I'll own.
What I have is that Polaroid kit, DX Nikkor 18-55mm & DX Nikkor 55-300mm. The last two came with my camera.
=(

greybeard · Dec 15, 2012

I used a Raynox 150 for a while and while it's not a true macro lens, it doesn't do bad at all. I now have a 105 micro Nikkor and I love it.

Willieboy · Dec 15, 2012

Nikon seems to make a number of 105mm lenses. Which of them do you guys like for the D5100?

Willieboy · Dec 15, 2012

Nikon seems to make a number of 105mm lenses. Which of them do you guys like for the D5100?

TheFantasticG · Dec 16, 2012

Avoid the Nikon 85mm f3.5 as it is very bland with colors and the bokeh is not as pleasing as the Tamron 90mm f2.8. The Nikon 105mm VR is damn spiffy but I found the Simga 105mm 2.8 EX too short most of the time which is why I upgraded to the Sigma 150mm 2.8.... Then added a 1.4x TC. I know that I'd be a nice setup on the D5100 sense it uses the same sensor.

greybeard · Dec 16, 2012

Willieboy said:
Nikon seems to make a number of 105mm lenses. Which of them do you guys like for the D5100?

Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens This is the one I use. They are around $900 new though, not exactly cheap but, the pictures are stunning. Some lenses will not AF with your d5100 and that may or may not be important to you. The Tokina and certain Nikons will not but, the Tamron and Sigma will. The one that I use will AF and has VR (vibration reduction). I need these two things as I shoot mostly hand held. If you shoot mostly with a tripod then you may not need these features.

sm4him · Dec 16, 2012

greybeard said:
Willieboy said:

Nikon seems to make a number of 105mm lenses. Which of them do you guys like for the D5100?

Click to expand...

Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens This is the one I use. They are around $900 new though, not exactly cheap but, the pictures are stunning. Some lenses will not AF with your d5100 and that may or may not be important to you. The Tokina and certain Nikons will not but, the Tamron and Sigma will. The one that I use will AF and has VR (vibration reduction). I need these two things as I shoot mostly hand held. If you shoot mostly with a tripod then you may not need these features.

Greybeard is correct, lenses like the Tokina 100mm will not autofocus on the D5100, so you have to use manual focus. That was a huge concern for me when I decided to try the Tokina. I have vision problems and a hand tremor, so I really thought I would *have* to have AF to get any decent results. But that's just not been the case. I shoot macro almost entirely hand-held, and have gotten some pretty reasonable results with the Tokina on manual focus:

passionflower_0057 by sm4him, on Flickr

I do have a D7000 now, so I can use the AF mode on the Tokina, but all of the shots in my Macro set on Flickr were with the D5100, manual focus.

TheFantasticG · Dec 16, 2012

Be aware the closer you get to 1:1 the more VR becomes a hindrance.

From Thom Hogan's site:

"Oh, you want to know about that caveat, do you? The exact words in the Nikon manual say "As the reproduction ratio increases from 1/30x [sic], the effects of vibration reduction gradually decrease." In other literature, Nikon has flat out said to turn off VR for macro use. What's the real answer? The manual is correct, basically. The closer you focus, the less VR has an impact on the final image. At 1:1 (the closest focus distance), it may not impart any benefit (it didn't seem to in the testing conditions I could create). So do you turn VR off when working in macro? If you're pressed up towards the limits of focus, I'd say yes--you're wasting battery life and potentially making it more difficult to hit a focus point. But if you're focused out beyond two or three feet (~.7m+), it probably makes sense to leave it on, as you'll get some benefit (though not the four stops Nikon claims for the system unless you're focusing far further out into the scene)."

http://www.bythom.com/105AFSlens.htm