Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:23 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:28 pm
Posts: 3
Hi guys, I have a Nikon D300s with a 18-200mm VR II zoom lens. I want to buy a macro lens cause i think macro photography is fascinating. So any suggestions about a good macro lens for my D300s would be really helpful. My budget is around 800-1000 AUD. I was checking the Nikon AF S 105 mm f2.8 micro the other day and it looked very handy with sharp image quality. cheers


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:47 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Osijek
well you don't have to look further if it fits your budget ;)

_________________
nikon d90 --->af-s dx 18-105mm; tamron 90mm macro

add me up on:

flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bakica/

deviant art:
http://tbensic.deviantart.com/

----:>bakice ce vladati svjetom<:----


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:28 pm
Posts: 3
Thanks. So you are giving me a green light for the 105mm 2.8?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:57 am
Posts: 1551
Location: Winterpeg, Manisnowba, Canada
The 105mm f/2.8 is an excellent lens for macro shots, you can't go wrong with it. Of course, remember that with focus breathing, the lens becomes slower (I believe it becomes something like f/4.9). The 105mm would be considered Nikon's flagship macro, but you could save a few bucks by going with a 3rd party lens, such as the Tamron 90mm f/2.8, or the Sigma 105mm f/2.8. They're both pretty good, but the Sigma has pretty terrible AF.

You could also look at some of the shorter focal length macro lenses from Nikon, such as the 85mm DX micro, with a slower aperture of f/3.5 but a lower price tag. There's also the 60mm f/2.8 micro, and finally the 200mm f/2.8 AF micro (but that's a bit out of your budget, they're selling for at least $1400 on evilBay).

I hope that I helped you with your decision,
-Evan

_________________
-Evan

Gear: 7 Nikon Nikkor AI-S and AF-S lenses, SB-700 flash, Nikon D7000, Nikon FM, variety of accessories

"There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs."
- Ansel Adams


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:09 am
Posts: 106
Location: Scotland
Having used the 105mm on my D3100 I can say that:

The AF is mind boggling fast
The image quality is superb
It feels good in your hands

With £600 (AUD895) it's quite affordable as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:24 am
Posts: 1815
+1 to the 105mm Nikkor

and VR is a plus if you're using it as a medium telephoto for street or portraiture.

I think you'll prefer 105mm to 150mm for bugs and things you're more likely to scare. 60mm would be better for flowers and plants. If you're shooting anything really small with the 60mm you may have lighting issues as you'll be right on top of it. Something to consider.

Sigma 150mm is pretty **** hot!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group