AF 200mm f/4 Micro

[AJ23]

Seems like this is a very rare lense, any users of this lense here?

Care to comment on the AF speed (if u use it), the build and image quality?

[Papilio]

Originally Posted by AJ23 Seems like this is a very rare lense, any users of this lense here? Care to comment on the AF speed (if u use it), the build and image quality?

Not that rare for the macro enthusiasts.

It's a highly rated lens with excellent sharpness. The lens is rather heavy though. AF is so-so only, but ok for most applications, noisy though. But doesn't AF speed also depend on the camera body used?

Built like a tank and comes with a tripod foot. I had a loaned one for a while, but decided in the end to get the Sigma EX180mm HSM f3.5 (which features the equivalent of the Silent Wave Motor). Optics on the Sigma is good, and the price is a lot cheaper than the Nikkor 200mm at around $1.3k. Then there's the new Tamron 180mm macro 1:1 recently available. All 3 lenses have IF, so the lens doesn't extend and retract when focusing.

Downside of the longer macro lenses are the weight, and virtually impossible to handhold, unless you shoot at ISO400 or 800. Trying to get the hand-holdable shutter speeds up to 1/200s (reciprocal of focal length rule of thumb) is not easy to achieve, particularly when you need to shoot at f11 or less. Hence you'll end up with a tripod as well. Not convenient if you shoot macro subjects which move around actively.

If 1:1 is not an absolute must, take a look at the telezoom macro Nikkor 70-180mm f4.5-5.6 ED micro. It's another good micro lens from the Nikkor stable which may be worth your consideration. I got one during a Cathay promotion at $1,099 a couple of years back. Not sure what it costs now.

[chucks]

Originally Posted by AJ23 Seems like this is a very rare lense, any users of this lense here? Care to comment on the AF speed (if u use it), the build and image quality?

I have both this and the 105 micro. The best I have used, but it's huge, not to mention heavy as well. I always have a tripod with me when out with this lens. Oh, I only use it in manual as I found myself more comfortable and som etimes even faster than the AF . Also, its ability to resolve details across all focal distances is amazing. This lens is in a league of its own.

[AJ23]

thanks for all the comments, is comtemplating to get the 105mm or 200mm, or wait for a new revision? Dilemma, dilemma, dilemma.

[Astin]

Wah AJ, you want to shoot the model's fingernail or eyelash ah?
(Ok Ok I know you want to shoot your Gundam fighters!)

[AJ23]

Originally Posted by Astin Wah AJ, you want to shoot the model's fingernail or eyelash ah? (Ok Ok I know you want to shoot your Gundam fighters!)

heehee, I want to shoot the eyes, pimples, eyebags, etc...

[espn]

Originally Posted by Astin Wah AJ, you want to shoot the model's fingernail or eyelash ah? (Ok Ok I know you want to shoot your Gundam fighters!)

Wrong Astin, he wants to shoot the model's lips

AJ23, when in doubt, the CS advice is BUY BOTH!!

[chucks]

Originally Posted by espn Wrong Astin, he wants to shoot the model's lips AJ23, when in doubt, the CS advice is BUY BOTH!!

That is only if money isn't a prob.

The 200 micro costs more than twice the 105 micro. So I recommend doing more research b4 parting w your hard earned money. U dun wanna buy an expensive lens and then left it in your dry cabinet to collect dust, rite?

U choose the lens, not the lens choose you.

[sykestang]

AJ23... if you're shooting still objects, I recommend the Nikkor AF60mm Macro f/2.8D... cheap, 1:1, and is the sharpest of all the Nikkor Macro series... but of cos unless you really want to shoot models' eyebag, pores, pimples or maybe black heads, the a 105mm or the 200mm would be a better choice as not to let them know what you're shooting...


Hey looks like we gets to tempt you now...

BUY the 60mm Macro, 105mm Macro, 200mm Macro and also the 70-180mm Macro together ... then you would not have any dilema on which to get, but maybe which to use then...

[AJ23]

Originally Posted by sykestang Hey looks like we gets to tempt you now... BUY the 60mm Macro, 105mm Macro, 200mm Macro and also the 70-180mm Macro together ... then you would not have any dilema on which to get, but maybe which to use then...

heehee, tempt me?

Who wouldn't want to get all? I need the first prize for Monday's TOTO...

60mm a bit too near for my likings, I need at least a 105mm. But then again, money not enough!

[AJ23]

Originally Posted by chucks That is only if money isn't a prob. The 200 micro costs more than twice the 105 micro. So I recommend doing more research b4 parting w your hard earned money. U dun wanna buy an expensive lens and then left it in your dry cabinet to collect dust, rite? U choose the lens, not the lens choose you.

/ignore epsn & sykestang

I agree with you. The 200mm is more than S$2k, while the 105mm is ard half of it. Hmm... need more research and sample pics...

[ellery]

Why not go about this more logically. Look at what u plan to do.
these are rough examples
Copy work flat object -60mm
mid size flowers, non insects 105mm
insects, smaller subjects 200mm

u can use a teleconverter with macro work.

Use a flash with anything over 105mm - use a flash any time you cannot get enough light to shoot at a workable f stop and shutter speed.


u could wait a long time for an improved model from Nikon for these. They represent what Nikon considers as the best for macro work. end of day is how u use it rather than what u use.