Questions about Micro AFS NIKON 60mm

[camerax]

alright guys, i really want to ask these questions, hopefully people can give me explanations.

there are so many things that confuse me about this lens.

first of all, HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO aim our lens from the subject to get 1:1 MAgnification??

and many people said this is too short for macro, then WHY the heck nikon release this then???

some people said, okay for portrait. but there are so many lenses out there, 50mm 1.8/1.4

WHY THIS LENS??? i am so dead curious.

actually i was tempted to get this one since its cheaper than 105mm VR. but many people said this is too short for macro.

so does it provide you enough working distance for SHOOTING BUGS / INSECTS??

and which one is better, this or tamron 90mm FOR MACRO PHOTOGRAPHY?

thanks for the answers : )

[Leong23]

Haiz....... there are no macro lenses too short for macro.

The main different between 60mm, 85mmPC 105mmVR or 200mmf/4 is the focal length.

The above except 85mmPC will able to achieve a magification of 1:1, but these all these lenses will have different working distance due to the different in focal length.

Working distance is very very useful if you are shooting insect, as every insect had their own circle of fear. If the enter into their circle of fear, high chance is that it will move/fly away.

But if you are shooting product, the product will not fly away by itself. But you had to know that the longer the lens, the further you had to shift back to shoot, many time, you might not have enough room to shift back. Therefore 60mm (very popular for copying works) and 85mmPC (very popular for product) will be consider.

105mmVR is currently the most popular macro lens in Nikon, light enough to handheld easily and the working distance is still ok for most insect.

For Portraits, 60mm, 85PC and 105VR is still good as it still have a aperture of f/2.8 wide open. Of course the bokeh will lose out to 50mmf1.4, 85mmf1.4 and 105DC.

I had sold off my 60mm macro and replace it with 85mmPC for flower.
For insect, i'm using 200mm Macro, tamron 90mm as backup.
For portrait i prefer my 85mmf1.4, only sometime i will use my 50mmf1.4.


So, maybe now you can ask yourself, what you need it for then you can easily decide which to buy.

[zac08]

A 60mm macro is mainly use for still life and products.

[GavinTing]

Originally Posted by camerax alright guys, i really want to ask these questions, hopefully people can give me explanations. there are so many things that confuse me about this lens. first of all, HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO aim our lens from the subject to get 1:1 MAgnification?? and many people said this is too short for macro, then WHY the heck nikon release this then??? some people said, okay for portrait. but there are so many lenses out there, 50mm 1.8/1.4 WHY THIS LENS??? i am so dead curious. actually i was tempted to get this one since its cheaper than 105mm VR. but many people said this is too short for macro. so does it provide you enough working distance for SHOOTING BUGS / INSECTS?? and which one is better, this or tamron 90mm FOR MACRO PHOTOGRAPHY? thanks for the answers : )

They say it's too short to be used "practically" You might have to be too close for comfort to a subject

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by GavinTing They say it's too short to be used "practically" You might have to be too close for comfort to a subject

Again, like Leong23 mentioned, it depends on what kind of macro you're shooting. For nature, the working distance is indeed too short but it's wonderful for copy work and small products like jewellery, watches etc because the subjects will be within an arm length for you to manipulate. That is definitely too close for comfort for most insects.

If there is a one-lens-fits-all, then the manufacturers would not have needed to make so many different focal lengths.

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by camerax first of all, HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO aim our lens from the subject to get 1:1 MAgnification??

Just look at the specs.. The minimum focusing distance (1:1 ratio) measured to the sensor plane for the lenses are as follow:

AF-S Micro 60/2.8 - 18.5cm
AF-S Micro 105/2.8 VR - 31.4cm

[camerax]

Originally Posted by lsisaxon Just look at the specs.. The minimum focusing distance (1:1 ratio) measured to the sensor plane for the lenses are as follow: AF-S Micro 60/2.8 - 18.5cm AF-S Micro 105/2.8 VR - 31.4cm

woww, actually 18 cm doesnt sound too bad

so tamron 90 will give you working distance about 27 cm then?? am i correct?

[camerax]

Originally Posted by lsisaxon Again, like Leong23 mentioned, it depends on what kind of macro you're shooting. For nature, the working distance is indeed too short but it's wonderful for copy work and small products like jewellery, watches etc because the subjects will be within an arm length for you to manipulate. That is definitely too close for comfort for most insects. If there is a one-lens-fits-all, then the manufacturers would not have needed to make so many different focal lengths.

Well technically, you can use 105 mm to replace 60mm. you just have to move back a little.

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by camerax woww, actually 18 cm doesnt sound too bad so tamron 90 will give you working distance about 27 cm then?? am i correct?

From specs it's 29cm. http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/90mm.asp

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by camerax Well technically, you can use 105 mm to replace 60mm. you just have to move back a little.

Yes, technically you can.. if you're shooting 1:1 all the time.... but if you need less magnification, then you'll need to move back a lot! Try copying an A4 document with the 60mm and with the 105mm and see what kind of working distance you're dealing with.

So it all boils down to whether it's practical or not. I have even used 300/4 at 1.5m to shoot some small creatures. It really depends on the application.

[camerax]

Originally Posted by lsisaxon Yes, technically you can.. if you're shooting 1:1 all the time.... but if you need less magnification, then you'll need to move back a lot! Try copying an A4 document with the 60mm and with the 105mm and see what kind of working distance you're dealing with. So it all boils down to whether it's practical or not. I have even used 300/4 at 1.5m to shoot some small creatures. It really depends on the application.

a lot??? like how long??

can you give me lil illustration , please.

like lets say, if i wanna get 1:2 magnification. how much further i should move back if i used 105mm compared to 60mm?

[Leong23]

Originally Posted by camerax a lot??? like how long?? can you give me lil illustration , please. like lets say, if i wanna get 1:2 magnification. how much further i should move back if i used 105mm compared to 60mm?

Originally Posted by lsisaxon Just look at the specs.. The minimum focusing distance (1:1 ratio) measured to the sensor plane for the lenses are as follow: AF-S Micro 60/2.8 - 18.5cm AF-S Micro 105/2.8 VR - 31.4cm

Just multiplex the distance by 2.

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by Leong23 Just multiplex the distance by 2.

I think it's less because this distance is to the sensor plane... but the concept is there.

[Leong23]

Originally Posted by lsisaxon I think it's less because this distance is to the sensor plane... but the concept is there.

Yes, you are right.

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by Leong23 Yes, you are right.

Here are the focus distance (m) against the ratio based on the markings on the lens.
Ratio ; AF-S 60/2.8 ; AF 105/2.8

1:1 ; 0.185 ; 0.314
1:2 ; ~0.23 ; ~0.39
1:3 ; ~0.3 ; ~0.48
1:4 ; ~0.38 ; ~0.59
1:5 ; ~0.45 ; ~0.7
1:10 ; ~0.8 ; ~1.3