Choosing a Nikon lens for insects but on budget

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Ecogeekmama
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:19 am

Choosing a Nikon lens for insects but on budget

Post by Ecogeekmama »

Hi! I’m new here and need some help with choosing a lens for shooting both still and moving insects outside, mainly in my garden (for now).

I have a Nikon D3200 and would like to add a dedicated macro lens. I’ve recently taken the plunge and started using manual focus which is turning out to be easier than I expected so I’m hoping it may have opened up lens choices.

I can spend up to $400 and have been looking at the:
Tokina AT-X 100mm f/2.8 PRO D
Nikon 85mm 3.5g ed vr dx
Or a Nikon 105mm 2.8d

My understanding is that only the 85mm lens will autofocus but if I skip the autofocus will either of the other two work? And what other consideration do I need to think about.

Thank you!
Laura

Ichthyophthirius
Posts: 1152
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

Hi Laura,

How about the Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro for Nikon (I think it's the most recent version but you can already get this lens second hand "as new" for less than $400)? https://www.sigmaphoto.com/105mm-f2-8-e ... -hsm-macro https://www.lenstip.com/318.1-Lens_revi ... ction.html

The Sigma is fixed length; it doesn't extend forward. Both AF and MF work reasonably well. Unfortunately it doesn't have a manual aperture ring.

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8668
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

You won't want autofocus all the time with macro, almost certainly, but it's useful. I usually autofocus then once it's locked, rock to get the eyes or whatever.
There aren't any bad macro lenses, a far as I know! Sigma, Tokina, Tamron are all fine - the later ones are generally better than earlier ones.
Sigmas recent ones have VR too which is a big help, though less so at closest distance.

Outside, you may find you'd like a longer lens than even 105mm. They all, I believe, shorten their focal length when focused close. 85 would be fine for table-top stuff, so if you can find one in budget, not a bad choice.
Chris R

Ecogeekmama
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:19 am

Post by Ecogeekmama »

Thank you I’ll take a look at it.
Ichthyophthirius wrote:Hi Laura,

How about the Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro for Nikon (I think it's the most recent version but you can already get this lens second hand "as new" for less than $400)? https://www.sigmaphoto.com/105mm-f2-8-e ... -hsm-macro https://www.lenstip.com/318.1-Lens_revi ... ction.html

The Sigma is fixed length; it doesn't extend forward. Both AF and MF work reasonably well. Unfortunately it doesn't have a manual aperture ring.
Laura

Ecogeekmama
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 6:19 am

Post by Ecogeekmama »

Thank! Unfortunately my budget won’t allow for a longer lens for now. I’m fortunate that I have a huge variety of insects in my yard and can sit quietly among them so I may be able to stay with a 100/105 and be okay...hopefully ;).

I also did some more research and it’s possible that the Tokina will af with the D3200 after all which is a plus.

Every time I think I’ve made a decision I get a bit overwhelmed again.
ChrisR wrote:You won't want autofocus all the time with macro, almost certainly, but it's useful. I usually autofocus then once it's locked, rock to get the eyes or whatever.
There aren't any bad macro lenses, a far as I know! Sigma, Tokina, Tamron are all fine - the later ones are generally better than earlier ones.
Sigmas recent ones have VR too which is a big help, though less so at closest distance.

Outside, you may find you'd like a longer lens than even 105mm. They all, I believe, shorten their focal length when focused close. 85 would be fine for table-top stuff, so if you can find one in budget, not a bad choice.
Laura

harisA
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:31 am
Location: Greece

Post by harisA »

You should also consider Oshiro 60mm for 130$-170$ depending on your location.

https://www.photomacrography.net/forum/ ... ro&start=0

It's a manual focus lens.Also you must be aware that Nikon D3200 is not supporting auto exposure with manual lenses.

RobertOToole
Posts: 2627
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:34 pm
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by RobertOToole »

Ecogeekmama wrote:Thank! Unfortunately my budget won’t allow for a longer lens for now. I’m fortunate that I have a huge variety of insects in my yard and can sit quietly among them so I may be able to stay with a 100/105 and be okay...hopefully ;).

I also did some more research and it’s possible that the Tokina will af with the D3200 after all which is a plus.

Every time I think I’ve made a decision I get a bit overwhelmed again.
ChrisR wrote:You won't want autofocus all the time with macro, almost certainly, but it's useful. I usually autofocus then once it's locked, rock to get the eyes or whatever.
There aren't any bad macro lenses, a far as I know! Sigma, Tokina, Tamron are all fine - the later ones are generally better than earlier ones.
Sigmas recent ones have VR too which is a big help, though less so at closest distance.

Outside, you may find you'd like a longer lens than even 105mm. They all, I believe, shorten their focal length when focused close. 85 would be fine for table-top stuff, so if you can find one in budget, not a bad choice.
Lots of good advice in the thread already.

The Tokina seems like the best option for $400. Paying over that for the Nikon isnt the best value for your money unless there is another reason you want nikon. For $500+ it might be better to pick up a used Sigma 150mm macro.

There are some really good values on used lenses. The old Cosina 100 is supposedly good and they cost $100. I picked up an Vivtar 55mm 1:1 macro for $40 in mint shape but there are some serious LoCAs with old designs like that. I picked up a Sigma 70mm in the box, looked unused, for $250.

Going over 100mm isn't always better BTW. Being closer is sometimes better in the field.

If you are using flash more working distance means harsher light since the source is smaller. Longer FL also gives you is a flatter perspective.

Hope this helps.

Robert

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic