Need help as to which macro lens to buy!


Jan 8, 2014
223
1
0
#1
Hi guys, I'm interested to take some macro shots for leisure and would like to get a lens for my d7100.
Have quite a few lenses already so would not be looking into telephoto use but instead a lens dedicated for macro!
Am interested in the tamron 180mm f3.5 or the sigma 150mm f2.8 as i'm on a budget.

Do offer your kind advice, thanks!
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#2
Hi guys, I'm interested to take some macro shots for leisure and would like to get a lens for my d7100.
Have quite a few lenses already so would not be looking into telephoto use but instead a lens dedicated for macro!
Am interested in the tamron 180mm f3.5 or the sigma 150mm f2.8 as i'm on a budget.

Do offer your kind advice, thanks!
They are both good lenses. But why not the Nikon's 105mm? I don't think that lens is too expensive either. However, I would also recommend the Raynox 250 (which is a clip on filter lens)... it is very good and cost around 2xx in Singapore only. This is by far one of the most budget you can get.
 

Jun 2, 2012
816
16
18
Singapore when back at home
#3
The Tamron 180mm & Sigma 150mm are good lenses. They are quite big & heavy too. Not to mention with a longer minimum focus distance

You may want give the Tamron SP 90mm & Micro Nikkor 85mm f/3.5G ED VR a look. Both are sharp & reasonably priced. Smaller size & very close focus distance too.
 

zeehamzah

Senior Member
Feb 8, 2011
1,306
6
38
#4
They are both good lenses. But why not the Nikon's 105mm? I don't think that lens is too expensive either. However, I would also recommend the Raynox 250 (which is a clip on filter lens)... it is very good and cost around 2xx in Singapore only. This is by far one of the most budget you can get.
Like what bro rhino123 suggest, you should try the Raynox 250 or even the 150, and maybe try Extension tubes too if you're on a tight budget. :)
 

Jan 8, 2014
223
1
0
#6
Thanks guys! The reason why I am not looking at the 90mm etc is due to the working distance as I prefer to have sufficient distance away from my target :) I'm really thankful for the suggestion of the Raynox lens converter and will definitely look into it! Thanks all :)
 

SkyStrike

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 29, 2010
3,444
11
38
Somewhere
#7
Thanks guys! The reason why I am not looking at the 90mm etc is due to the working distance as I prefer to have sufficient distance away from my target :) I'm really thankful for the suggestion of the Raynox lens converter and will definitely look into it! Thanks all :)
You may want to note that when using raynox 250, your working distance is either same or lesser then what Tamron 90mm offers... (using it on my 50mm gives me about 11 to 12 cm, while telephoto dist of >150mm is lesser then 5 cm.)

btw, Are you shooting butterflies?
 

Jan 8, 2014
223
1
0
#8
Oh my, I thought only max aperature affected, didn't remb that working distance will be reduced just like extension tubes.. hmm thanks for the heads up! Will be likely shooting butterflies and other non creepy insects. No spiders lol.
 

SkyStrike

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 29, 2010
3,444
11
38
Somewhere
#9
Oh my, I thought only max aperature affected, didn't remb that working distance will be reduced just like extension tubes.. hmm thanks for the heads up! Will be likely shooting butterflies and other non creepy insects. No spiders lol.
Max aperture isn't affected when you attach raynox on the lens :)

f1.8 is still f1.8, but expect way lesser dof due to the macro focusing distance. That said, I'm usually using at least f11 to 16 on my raynox and lens combo.
 

Jan 8, 2014
223
1
0
#10
Max aperture isn't affected when you attach raynox on the lens :)

f1.8 is still f1.8, but expect way lesser dof due to the macro focusing distance. That said, I'm usually using at least f11 to 16 on my raynox and lens combo.
Oh, so max aperature & working distance affected for lens with extension tube while working distance affected for raydox? Hmmm then isn't raydox much more superior than extension tubes?
 

SkyStrike

Moderator
Staff member
Nov 29, 2010
3,444
11
38
Somewhere
#11
Oh, so max aperature & working distance affected for lens with extension tube while working distance affected for raydox? Hmmm then isn't raydox much more superior than extension tubes?
Not say superior... extension tubes have no extra glass element to further degrade the image quality. But loses one stop of light and cheaper ext tubes do not allow electronic communications, so you may lose aperture control from the camera

Raynox have extra glass element, that potentially degrade the image quality. But still maintains electronic aperture control That said, raynox glass element is quite good.
 

Jan 8, 2014
223
1
0
#12
Not say superior... extension tubes have no extra glass element to further degrade the image quality. But loses one stop of light and cheaper ext tubes do not allow electronic communications, so you may lose aperture control from the camera

Raynox have extra glass element, that potentially degrade the image quality. But still maintains electronic aperture control That said, raynox glass element is quite good.
I see, thanks alot for the information! it's really helpful :)
 

shierwin

Senior Member
Dec 29, 2008
3,435
8
38
East Coast
#13
If you want to increase working distance from the subject get the 150mm or 180mm
 

Dec 12, 2009
1,961
2
0
#14
do note for raynox you only have limited focusing range and also depends on the lens you attached to. Between raynox and a second hand tamron I would top up $100+ more and get tamron. It can be used as a general 90mm lens too other than macro.

For still objects raynox is fine but not so sure for moving objects.
 

rhino123

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 1, 2006
5,243
15
38
NA
#16
do note for raynox you only have limited focusing range and also depends on the lens you attached to. Between raynox and a second hand tamron I would top up $100+ more and get tamron. It can be used as a general 90mm lens too other than macro.

For still objects raynox is fine but not so sure for moving objects.
Using any closeup lens filter like the Raynox, would cause the user to lost the ability to focus to infinity. For macro usage, I find that not too much of a problem because (for me) I will normally to close to the subject anyway.

Yes, it can be a bit tough if your subject is moving.


Do check out Dxomark for reviews/ratings/
What is your point? DXOmark suddenly becoming the bible to photography and equipment?
 

Achim Reh

New Member
Nov 1, 2011
407
1
0
#17
A++ for the Nikon 105 / 2.8. Fantastic lens . Not to forget, if you ever want to sell it again, the Nikon lens holds the value, while Sigma/Tamron and so on depreciate to sub-zero the moment you unpack it.

P.S. DXOmark is kind of the bible for lenses ( if you know how to read and understand MPF diagrams) , the only problem is , most people don't understand what is written in there ( and that counts for DXO and the Bible ;-) ) I like the fact that DXO mark publishes lots of raw data , however, I don't always agree with the conclusion they draw.
 

Last edited:
Top Bottom