Need help on macro lense

[sandman]

Ineed a new macro lense
choices are
NIKON 60 mm
NIKON 105mm
TAMRON 90mm

I want it to double up as a portrait, and maybe general lense ,but mainly macro work,
I can see from swampy's ''bug shot'' how good the 60mm is ,but is it 1.1, how about the 105 as a portrait , and has anyone tried the tamron?

questions? questions?, but this is easier then getting in my car and driving 20mls up the road to the nearest camera shop, and as for asking over the phone, .forget it.

Any feedback greaty accepted ,thanks.

The wifes just put a great big breakfast of bacon and eggs in front of me ,, so i'm going.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Wichita Wayne]

We also have an old Nikkor 105 AI lens that works great too but it does not see much use on the S2. Mostly we use the 60 on the S2. And most of the work we do with the 60 is portrait work when we want to use a top performing prime lens. Actually any of the lenses you listed should do fine. If you can you might try each one of them on the S2 at a shop and then make your decision. We are very happy with the 60.

[Tom Nolle]

I'm a Sigma fan, and I got the 180mm f3.5 macro EX. My needs are a bit different, but I was looking for something that I could use for close-ups without getting so close that I was part of the ecosystem! I've found, since I bought the lens, that it's a dynamite telephoto on the S2, especially with the Sigma 1.4x teleconverter (making it nearly 400mm on the S2), and it's also nice for face shots from a distance of fifteen or twenty feet. Probably too much magnification for studio work, though.

Their 105 is supposed to be awesome, but I haven't tried it.

Tom

[sandman]

Thanks wayne
I'm jumping between threads here,
Seriously thinking of the 60mm, the 105 will give me 150mm too long for portraits really.
Wish i could try them all , i'll buy it over the net, the camera shops within a 50ml radius from me don't stock them all , they order them in, and are premium prices. We pay over here in pounds what you pay in dollars, so are prices are 50% higher roughly.
I do buy from american sites, but it,s the warrenty , it,s not valid in england ,something goes wrong, then it's back to the states, too much hassle.

what filter size is the 60mm?.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Swampy]

The filter size for the Nikkor 60mm is 62mm. You saw my bug shot, but that wasn't very sharp. I thought I had posted a pic somewhere here of the center of a small flower, but I couldn't find it, so I'll post it again here. The attached image is of a Impatiene (spelling!?) flower in my wife's garden. The flower is about 1 1/4" (about 32mm) in diameter total and the Pistil in the center of the flower is about 3/16" (4.7mm) long and 1/16" (1.5mm) diameter.

Still probably not the sharpest picture I've taken, but this is the first one that popped into my head when looking...

And you are correct, my only gripe with the 60mm is that I have to get so close to get right up in there. Sometimes I find myself only 2-3 inches away from the subject often with a shadow being cast on it. I'd like the try the 105mm myself still, but I AM really happy with the 60mm.

[sandman]

Thanks swampy
It's a compromise between the 60mm being good for portraits and macro ,or the 105 being better at macro's but not as good as a portrait/general lense.Price comes into it as well the 60mm over here is £480 while the 105 is £600 plus. I can't find much info on the tamron, apart from the salesman at jessops telling me it's a great lense. but not in stock.
It's what i needed ,a shot showing me the lense.

ps
I don't know if your into soccer,but see in my local paper that one of my teams all time greats Jurgen klinsmann is playing for Orange County Blue Stars under the name of jay goppingen. just a bit of useless information.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[sandman]

Thanks tom
Another one to think about, i don't do studio work so a 180 at about 20ft would give a nice D.O.F. never thought about a long macro, see your point about getting too close, swampy made the same point about shadows. I want to make the right choice first time and not spend time regretting it later on, i'm still leaning towards the 60mm, but i'll take my time and let you know

Thanks
Sandman

[lightwrangler]

I have the 90mm 2.8 Tamron AF. It's sharp and easy to use. I do both macro and portrait work with it. At an effective 135mm I like it for headshots as it gives you good control over depth of field. While some might find it a little long for portrait work, for me it's a nice compromise since it's a really great macro lens. You can get very close (better than 1:1) without being right on top of your subject. If you don't work in the studio and you can get a little distance on your portraits, the 90 shouldn't be too hard to work with. Filter size is 55mm, which while it isn't too big, it is the only 55mm filter size lens I have. Since I have mostly 62mm and 67mm lenses, I use a step down ring from 62mm when I need a filter. Mostly I use the Lee filter system so this isn't much of a problem for me. This is the second Tamron 90mm I have owned (previous was a Pentax mount) and both have exceeded my expectations with regard to image quality and build for the price.

[sandman]

Thanks lightwrangler
Another spanner in the works!, i was secretly hoping no one had the tamron, to make my decision easier, as i said before ,the salesman from jessops said it was '' a little cracker'', but on a 3 week backlist.
So i'll have to take more time than i thought and try to find somewhere , where i can try them out before buying, (so much for the cheaper internet option).
There is a shop in east sussex that advertise's them all' so as i've got the week off ,i'll drive down and see .
Thanks for all your help, i knew even though i'm a wise cracking brit, i'd get all the advise i needed.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[stevebri]

Remember that although the 1.5 crop factor for lenses is exactly that a crop, not a perspective change.

So the 60mm crops to 90mm but still has the distortion and perspective of a 60mm. This can be ok for portraits but close ups might not be 'flat' enough.

I bought the 105mm AFD Macro and I love it, it feels really good on the S2 and very well balanced.

Thinking ahead, if Fuji's next camera (S3?) is full frame, or a fuller frame, and assuming we all buy one and keep or S2's as spares, a 60mm then won't double up as a portrait.

Also, I have owned Tokina Tamron and Sigma lenses in the past and no editor or client has ever mentioned it or knew the difference, you may want to try speed of AF and also how it feels using maunal, because most close up critical work tends to be done manually, also do the non Nikons have a focus limiter...?

It may not come down to supposed image quality but moreover ergonomics...

Steve

www.stevebrickles.com

[sandman]

Thanks Steve
All new posts pose more questions than answers !.Never thought about the S3 and the full frame issue, your right of course about 60mm ,no good for portraits. But i won't buy today ,for something i may or may not buy tomorrow

I think your wrong to assume that all or nearly all of us will buy the S3 . I for one can't afford £2000 every 2 years, so i'll skip it and wait for the S4. nothing wrong with my S2 anyway.

Still your post have given me more to think about, thanks. Might even buy both nikkons ,the 105 for macro, and the 60 for portraits(Just got a huge bonus on a job i did nearly a year ago and forgot about).

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Wichita Wayne]

The 60mm lens on the S2 is cropped, but what croped is out are the edges where the distortion occurs. And even though I know that what you are saying is optically true; I see no difference, except for perspective, between my 105 and my 60 on either the S2 or a full frame 35mm camera. And that includes a lot of shots with both lenses wide open.

As far as Tokina, Tamron and Sigma lenses go, my son-in-law uses Sigma's on his S2 and I sure cannot see any quality difference between his pictures and mine. We shoot weddings where he double shoots behind me with a Sigma lens on his S2 and when I compare his pictures to mine I don't see any noticeable difference.

[Wichita Wayne]

The reason that we have full frame 35mm is not magic. Camera companies choose to use 35mm motion picture film in 35mm cameras because it was already available and factories would not have to be retooled for a new film format. The motion picture film was also already available in the form of positive film that would make slides. They did make the picture size double because it provided higher quality slides and pictures and was easy to do with the film moving horizontally rather then vertically like in a movie camera. So the size of the sensor is not the critical factor. A smaller sensor is cheaper and easier to manufacture and it you can get the same quality with a smaller sensor then it makes sense to do so. Can you imagine the size of a TIF file on a S2 sensor that was the size of full frame 35mm? Some pros (myself included) think that they can nearly match medium format with their S2. What I would like to see in the future is not more resolution, but more latitude and greater sensitivity. The S2 really excels at ISO 1600 under natural light. It would be great if Fuji could achieve the same quality at ISO 6400 or even 12800. And, when I replace my S2 I want a full 10 stops of latitude.

[Swampy]

I will add on about the ergonomics of the lenses. I love my 60mm. Click one switch on the lens and you're in manual focus. The switch is a rotating lock switch right by the focus ring. Nicely placed.

I have a Sigma 24-70mm that I hate doing manual focus on (good thing I don't do it very often), but I slide the collar to the MF posistion and the camera still tries to autofocus and it sounds like the batteries are dieing when it does. So, I have to flip the MF switch on the front of the S2 as well, which is a very long throw compared to going from Single and Continuous AF.

So, ergonomics/functionality are definitely important. Of course, now that I'm posting this, someone is probably going to post that I have a bad Sigma lens. :)

[stevebri]

Wayne I agree with you totally, and would be the first in line to say we don't need a full 35mm frame. One of the reasons we all think our S2's perform on a par with 120 film is precisely this, as you mentioned, but cropping and therefore removing the worst part of any lens, the edges.

Why be restricted by the hangover from the past, Nikon has made it's point by releasing super wide lenses for the D1/D100's that won't really work on a normal or full frame SLR.

Sports guys love the fact that their 300mm becomes a 450mm.

However, sales are sales, profit is profit and Fuji i am sure know that if they made a full frame camera, with a superfast write speed and big buffer lots of us would buy it. The Canon 1Ds is living proof of that, whilst my S2 is fab and 'Just about' makes a 50mb A3 double page spread with a little more interpolation, a full frame would actually help me on certain jobs.

But getting back to the original point for Sandman, mate, just go to a pro shop like Calumet, or Warners or Leeds and ask to try them all. take in your S2 and fill it up with RAW files literally in the shop.

Good luck.

Steve
www.stevebrickles.com

[sandman]

Thanks guys , did'nt know this thread would stir up quite a hornets nests of opions, still that's whats the forum's here for,
i'll reply quickly to the last 3 threads.
Wayne , cheers, could'nt find a stockist for the sigma, so left it off my list, but i've read the history of photoghaphy ,so i know how 35mm came from the old motion picture industry . and also i might start a thread on ISO values.
Swampy, thanks for the info on m/f switch, i'll do most of my macro in manual , so that will swing it.
Steve, thanks for making me think about the S3 and full frames ,and starting a whole new discussion.
Thanks lightwrangler, for the tamron info.
Lastly i'd like to now wind up this thread, by saying ,i'm going into London today to definitly buy both nikons.....(unless the salesman have the tamron or sigma in stock ?????). ah well, bye for now and.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Wichita Wayne]

This wedding guy is also glad that his $120 70-300 Nikkor G lens has turned into a 105-450. When I set the S2 to ISO 1600 with this lens I can get cerimony shots like never before using just a monopod. Moving around is really easy. Anybody that doesn't have this range in their lenses already should look into this lens. Mine is a real good performer. Here is a shot from a recent wedding with that lens. The picture is straight out of the camera se to Org, Org, Off at ISO 1600 and 4256 Normal. It has not been processed in anyway, except to convert it to 640X480 for easier viewing on the internet. I was over 70 feet away shooting with a monopod. shooting at 1/125 sec. with F-5.6 in program mode. The Priest had just told a funny storie about the bride and groom while they were dating. After processing in Photoshop to sharpen the lines and bring up the contrast this should be a great album shot.

[sandman]

I can see this thread running longer than mary decker.
Thats a interesting shot wayne ,on any lense ,no noise at 1600 and on a mono pod , i'm going to do some tests later ,on ISO values at different F stops and shutter speeds, i'll post the results.
Meanwhile to finally wind up this thread, ordered and paid for both nikon's. About 2 weeks delivery, there seems a shortage of stock on all nikon's just now in great britain, had the same trouble with my 24-120 VR. still I'm in no great hurry.
I'm now off to spend the last of my money ,on my lovely wife, by the way ,i ordered the HYPER UTILITY as well (might as well see what all of you are on about), but thats for another time, another thread

Happy shooting
Sandman

[sandman]

Hi smunky
I don't think it was that it was disliked, it was just you asked for comments , and you got them, no one will critize this one ,i love it, the colours are just ,brilliant
I've ordered the 60mm and the 105, if my pics come out near this i'll be very happy, great shot

Happy shooting
Sandman

[sandman]

Male model? my wifes still looking for the model male!!.When i get the 105mm i'll post a shot ,in the meantime, boy it's hot today, just missed the record for the hottest day on record, peaked at 98 degrees a few miles west of here. might not sound much to our friends in las vegas and southern california, but to us in britain it's hot. rails are buckling, droughts forecast , people can't work, i'm not kidding thats the news all over britain today. How do you folks cope in western U.S.A. NO REPLYS PLEASE, just a observation.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Sneakyracer]

I just got a used Nikon AF-D 60mm f2.8 micro and I absolutely love the lens. It has "snap" !, nice contrast and unbelievable sharpness. Manual focus is actually very precise and nicely damped, the best i have tried in any nikon af lens. Here are some sample pics:


http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1665452

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1665354

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1665351

http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1665347

http://www.hpphoto.com/sessions/461391408807/24268409lg.jpg

http://www.hpphoto.com/sessions/461391408807/24268407lg.jpg


http://www.hpphoto.com/sessions/461391408807/24268403lg.jpg

http://www.hpphoto.com/sessions/461391408807/24268404lg.jpg

[sandman]

While i was posting a pic last night a special delivery arrived with my 60mm macro, (after 4 weeks wait). but it appears my 105mm is still out of stock at nikon U.K. until mid sept. ah well , !! at least i've got one to try out later on , i'll post a pic , if i can take a good enough one?

[Markraw]

Hi Sandman,

I have the Sigma 105mm and couldn't be happier! It is very sharp and I don't think that you'll find that there is much of a difference between this and the Nikon or Tamron, so I would go for price. Especially if you decide that you want both a 60mm and a 105. Here is a shot that I took with the Sigma and a Nikon SB-29.

Cheers,

Mark

[sandman]

Hi Mark
Had the nikon since Sat but just have'nt had time to try it, got next week off , so i'll give it a good run then.
The 105 is out of stock untill oct, might cancell it , have'nt got any room in my bag anyway.
I'll post something when ,and if ,i consider it good enough for you guys.

Thanks Mark, and do me a favour and post your location.

Happy shooting
Sandman

[Markraw]

Hi Sandman,

I'm in the United Arab Emirates. I paid about $280 US for the Sigma 105mm. Sorry folks, next time I'll post a smaller jpeg of my image!

Cheers,

Mark

[JPS]

...the FIRST lens I bought together with my S2 was the Tamron SP90 mm. f2.8 macro, but after 2 weeks I traded it for the Micro-Nikkor 60mm. f2.8, only because I thought it was too long for portraits -although I enjoyed it very much for macro- !
I used the Micro-Nikkor less than a week and re-traded it back for the Tamron, as it was too short for macro (fantastic lens, razor-sharp, but one has to go really too close to the bugs, wich makes them fly away...).
Now I learned the lesson: I bought ONE lens for portrait, and I'll keep the Tamron for my macro works -as it's as sharp, IMHO, as the 60mm. Nikkor- !
You can judge by yourself on the following pic...
S2 Pro + Tamron SP 90 + SB-80DX - 1:125 @ f11 - ISO 100
ORG-ORG-OFF - Post-process: slightly cropped - resized - USM 200,0.3,0 - That's all...

[pauly99]

JPS, gorgeous picture. Not commenting on your pic by no means but is it difficult when shooting at such close proximity to dragonfly's and such to get sharpness througout the image?
Would it make a heck of a lot of difference to shoot that dragonfly at F5.6 or F22?

[JPS]

Hi ! thanks for looking... About your question: the difference it would have made by shooting at f22 or more would only increase -a bit- the DOF, but I wanted to get only the "front" of the dragonfly sharp, and leave the tail OOF... also, it was about what my SB-80DX setting were ! ... I think I underexposed of about one point, else the whole pic woud have been too dark ! ...remember that I shot at ISO 100 !?!!
Regards,
Jean-Pierre