Options for macro photography

proudgeek

VIP you can absolutely use the focus ring to accumulate a collection of images for stacking purposes. However, a rail is infinitely easier. You have marks that allow you to determine your increments (which you don't really have on a lens) and I think the whole set up is much steadier. Now you can go out and spend several hundred dollars on a computer driven rail, but I'm using one right now that I picked up for about $70 (the brand name is Kiwi). Does it create limitations? Probably, nothing compared to the limitations created by the idiot behind the camera.

Vipmediastar_JZ

Ok that sounds good. I don't want to spend more money on something I`ll do once in a while. How about a cam ranger or similar that lets you touch to focus and trigger with a remote or even the app itself? I see myself using that more often than the rail.

I tried focus stacking a cupcake and beign a novice to photoshop I got confused and frustrated with the layers. I'll probably look into helicon or similar product to automate that part.

proudgeek

I use Zerene. $189 all in. And I agree with you about not dropping a ton if you think you only want to play around. A cam ranger could work.

Tradewind35

For macro work surely a tripod is essential? So I don't know why weight of the camera body is likely to be an issue. If you want repeatable images of small things to the same scale - product photgraphy etc -then its tripod work and a decent prime macro lens is the way to do it. The later 55mm Micro Nikkors do not allow you to get far enough away from small objects so it has to be a 105mm - the 200mm is of course excellent but rare - buy one if you can find a good one. (Even rarer is the super 70-180mm AF Micro).
What you will probably be able to do without in a macro lens is Auto focus. Much macro work involves previewing depth of field to get the focus right on the bits you want so that can all be done by manual focusing. Answer therefore is to find a second hand 105mm f2.8 mf Micro Nikkor - because they are unfashionably manual focus they might be picked up at a reasonable price - the optics are as good as you could hope for and the mechanical construction is as exquisite as any lens Nikon ever turned out. I tried a Sigma macro but it was far inferior to my Micro- Nikkors - I understand the later Sigs are better built.

WestEndFoto

I currently have the 200mm f/4, the RRS rails (sideways and back and forth), the Kenko extension tunes and an older TC-201 that I bought just for the lens. This spring I will nail the off camera flashes and this year will be the year I engross myself in Macro.

BVS

So, bottom line, if you guys were going to buy a macro lens today which one would you buy and why?

WestEndFoto

If money is no object, the longest possible one, which I did with my 200. It is the best for skittish creatures and not blocking the light. I don't care what else it does, as I bought it to be the best possible macro lens. On my lens, it has a massive manual focus ring, which is important because real macro work usually means manual focus. It is also an excellent general telephoto lens. If I want to shoot portraits at 200mm, I will buy the f/2.

heartyfisher

I have the old sigma 150 macro ..F2.8 .. the new one with OS seems like an awesome lense just about the perfect portrait prime lense too.

spraynpray

It comes down to what light you use. If you are prepared to settle for the ambient light which can mean hard shadows, then a long lens is easiest. If it is cloudy, the ambient light gets nice and soft, but there are less insects about. If you want to control your light and get good wrap, a shorter lens is best, but using one requires more commitment than most people are prepared to give. I always use a 60mm, a flash and continuous auto focus for fast moving subjects, switching to manual for stacks or static subjects. Your choice.

paulr

If you want total informationn on macro/stacking, watch the series of videos by Michael Erlewine on You Tube
He goes in to great detail on the subject with full explanation of different lenses.

You need to select which video meets your requirements on technical issues.
His recommendation for the best macro lens is the now very rare Voigtander APO-lanthar 125mm F2.5 lens
Michael Erlewine has long been a expert in this field and his videos on numerous subject of photography are excellent.

spraynpray

Superb series of videos @paulr, good link. They will take newcomers through macro and focus stacking from A to Z at a slow learning pace.

proudgeek

If money were no object I'd buy two — the 200mm f/4 and the 60mm f/2.8, depending on whether I was shooting in a controlled environment or outdoors. What I'd really like to see Nikon do is offer a lens with a flexible reproduction ratio, like Canon. I think this would be ideal for serious bug stacking. I've been following a scientist on Flickr who does amazing work with bees using this lens.
I currently own the 105mm f/2.8, and while I love it I do believe it's a bit of a compromise between the two mentioned above. I know that given how revered this lens is on this forum that's a bit blasphemous.

tcole1983

I would still buy my 105 F2.8 as I use it for multiple purposes and it fills a gap for me in terms of the focal length between my other lenses. It is by far my favorite portrait lens out of what I own. Nikon hasn't released anything else since I purchased my 105 that I would consider and I don't care much for the the third party offerings. If they updated one of the longer focal length older macros I would possible interested in those, but as is the 105 was the best choice for me. My second choice was the 60.

pictureted

I spend a great deal of time crawling around my garden with a macro lens. I also do quite a lot copy work, still life images and flowers. I've assembled my dream equipment set over the past several years and have regularly use Nikon's 55/2.8 (now broken with stuck aperture blades) 60/2.8G, 105/2.8VR and 200/4 macro, the Zeiss 50/2 and 100/2 makro planars and an 80/2.8 Tilt/Shift lens. I shoot with a D810 and also D7100, D7000 and D90. For focusing support I use both the Novoflex Castel Q (with an accessory for collared lenses) and the new Kirk rail.

For your wife's use I'd recommend the least expensive new DX body with the kit lens (for general use) and any inexpensive 85-105mm macro lens. For what she's shooting any of the lenses available would be exceptional- I've never heard of a macro lens that wasn't sharp. I usually shoot at f5.6 to f11 for depth of field. Beyond that diffraction limits affect the image too much. Spending money on AF or VR is a waste for macro. I doubt I've used either more any one or two times. They also make the lens larger and heavier. The Nikon 105 is a real pig in comparison to the Zeiss 100 - Nikon does focus to 1:1 rather than 1:2, but the Zeiss is f2 up to 1:2 (by then the Nikon is f3.2) and the manual focus is far superior on the Zeiss. The Tokina 100mm is less than 400USD and very highly regarded.

I'd also use a copy stand (an old enlarger works well when headless) and get the Kirk rail. The ability to rotate the QR for a camera or collared lens is terrific and it's impeccably made and superbly designed. The RRS rail uses their lever release which isn't compatible with the Novoflex rail (for micro positioning you use two rails) and it requires another clamp for collared lenses.

WestEndFoto

I spend a great deal of time crawling around my garden with a macro lens. I also do quite a lot copy work, still life images and flowers. I've assembled my dream equipment set over the past several years and have regularly use Nikon's 55/2.8 (now broken with stuck aperture blades) 60/2.8G, 105/2.8VR and 200/4 macro, the Zeiss 50/2 and 100/2 makro planars and an 80/2.8 Tilt/Shift lens. I shoot with a D810 and also D7100, D7000 and D90. For focusing support I use both the Novoflex Castel Q (with an accessory for collared lenses) and the new Kirk rail.

For your wife's use I'd recommend the least expensive new DX body with the kit lens (for general use) and any inexpensive 85-105mm macro lens. For what she's shooting any of the lenses available would be exceptional- I've never heard of a macro lens that wasn't sharp. I usually shoot at f5.6 to f11 for depth of field. Beyond that diffraction limits affect the image too much. Spending money on AF or VR is a waste for macro. I doubt I've used either more any one or two times. They also make the lens larger and heavier. The Nikon 105 is a real pig in comparison to the Zeiss 100 - Nikon does focus to 1:1 rather than 1:2, but the Zeiss is f2 up to 1:2 (by then the Nikon is f3.2) and the manual focus is far superior on the Zeiss. The Tokina 100mm is less than 400USD and very highly regarded.

I'd also use a copy stand (an old enlarger works well when headless) and get the Kirk rail. The ability to rotate the QR for a camera or collared lens is terrific and it's impeccably made and superbly designed. The RRS rail uses their lever release which isn't compatible with the Novoflex rail (for micro positioning you use two rails) and it requires another clamp for collared lenses.

You must have some fabulous images. You should put some on PAD.

Snowleopard

Does anyone know where I can find the extension bellows for the PB-6? They seam really hard to find...... I have a PB-6 and want the extension.....

paulr

It took me 2 years to find one ,just keep watching Ebay. I must add that using the PB-6E does bring its own problems, DOF is very limited even when used with the Nikon 105 bellows lens. I don't think Nikon produced many a bit like the PB-D spacers for the D3/4 enabling the camera to be used in landscape mode.