D800 Macro Lens

Ksanti

Ksanti

Ksanti

Soldato
Joined
10 Feb 2010
Posts
3,248
Hey guys, the D800 swap (rather than D700) swap is looking pretty much certain. I've been using a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 for my Macro stuff on my 5D, but I'm not sure how the Tamron performs on as high resolution a sensor as that of the D800? Dxomark hasn't tested lenses on the D800 yet as far as I know and I'm not sure on their macro lens testing?

Is there anything really worth the cost over the Tamron in terms of value for money? I realise the first party ones are better but obviously the 90mm outresolves my 5D in the right circumstances - I'm just not sure by how much and if using it on the D800 would only result in me getting about 15MP of detail? Though I don't do a huge amount of macro specific work, most of my big prints (30*20) were taken with the 90mm and I'd like to go even bigger with the D800, I'm just not sure what to get?

Are there older Nikon macro lenses AF-D etc. that are bargains or, optically speaking (not fussed with VR or AF speed etc.), is there not that much higher you could go short of, say, a Zeiss 100 f/2?
 
Before someone jumps down my throat, I /would/ have posted this in a spec me or Nikon thread, but then we don't have one :P
 
Get the nikon 105mm F2.8 VR macro lens. Its immensely sharp and the VR is brilliant. It also can resolve the detail of a D800 sensor. If you get your camera and live in commuting distance of me you are more than welcome to pop by on a weekend and give mine a try.

Its even fully weather sealed so you can go out in the awful weather and not have a care in the world :D Been out in torrential rain and snow with my D3 and 105mm F2.8 VR attached and came home with some great shots.
 
Btw, you say you aren't fussed about the VR, yet that nikon lens can take a perfectly sharp handheld shot 9/10 times at 1/20 shutter speed using the VR. Means you can use a far lower ISO in most cases and even less flash power for sensitive subjects. Some of my most successful images in terms of quality and revenue have been taken with my 105mm F2.8G VR and due to that, I'd never part with it lol.

In fact, I might even buy a spare, just in case :D
 
I almost exclusively use a tripod and natural light for my macro work is the thing. It very rarely tends to be work with animals and insects - more often dew drops, spider webs or water forms etc. which don't tend to move. It would be an extra £400 for the sake of VR and maybe what seems to be a marginal bit of sharpness - plus over half a stop more vignetting and more distortion than the Tamron.

Thing is, I don't fully understand the DXOMark tests - are the figures given wide open only for resolution etc.? Macro lenses are almost invariably sharper than most others, but then tested on the D3X, DXOMark tells me that the Sigma 85 has about 16MP of detail compared to the Tamron macro getting 13MP of detail? That surely makes no sense?

Resolving 13MP on a 24MP FF sensor seems worrying on a macro lens unless there are some weird reasons why Macro lenses don't get rated as sharp on Dxomark? That said, the Nikon 105 only resolved 16MP according to them so I'm really not sure on that front...
 
Fair enough on the tripod use, perhaps look at the older 105 from nikon then that can be used with bellows and is optically very similar (not weather sealed mind). I've not got any experience with that though, but robert on here does though who works in a camera shop (also owns a D3!)

I've used the sigma 150mm F2.8 on my canon camera (5D2) and that was a great piece of kit, yet the focusing when it was poor lighting wasn't great at all and it wasn't anywhere near as fast or accurate as the 105mm F2.8G VR by nikon.

Sigma make a 105mm F2.8 version also, but I've never used that either.
 
Ksanti said:
Thing is, I don't fully understand the DXOMark tests - are the figures given wide open only for resolution etc.? Macro lenses are almost invariably sharper than most others, but then tested on the D3X, DXOMark tells me that the Sigma 85 has about 16MP ?
Click to expand...

Well DXO say the Nikon 85 1.4G is 19mp, as I'v compared the Sigma 85 to it, and the Nikon was a touch sharper, I would say DXO's scores sounds about right.
 
An Exception said:
Well DXO say the Nikon 85 1.4G is 19mp, as I'v compared the Sigma 85 to it, and the Nikon was a touch sharper, I would say DXO's scores sounds about right.
Click to expand...

Oh those I don't doubt, but my point is how do they test it that would disadvantage the macro lenses so much? Would they have tested them at closer focusing distances meaning more stuff is out of focus which could have been interpreted by an algorithm (again, don't know the ins and outs of their testing) as softness?

I don't doubt the Nikon 105 is sharper than the Tamron 90, nor that the Nikon 85 is sharper than the Sigma 85. What I'm confused about is how the Nikon 105 Macro is supposedly softer than the 85 1.4, which it plainly isn't?
 
Well when you say can't resolve a D800's resolution what do you mean? Because if you go by not resolving as high as the MP count under comparing lenses then nothing outresolves anything - you'll very rarely find a lens on a 12MP camera, say, scoring anything over 9MP of detail.
 
Perhaps compare what you get out of your macro at it's sharpest setting, compared to my 85 on my d800e. You can downsize it to 12mp to compare like for like, but it should also give you an idea of what to expect at 36mp.

85mm sample
 
Okay will do, Rhys, but I was always under the impression that seeing as macro lenses basically have two absolute priorities - sharpness and 1:1 magnification, I was just thrown by the idea that the 85s are sharper.
 
Have any of you guys used the new Tamron 90mm? The VC one? The samples on ephotozine look awesome and I imagine after a couple of months it will fall in price.
http://www.magezinepublishing.com/e.../highres/Tamron90mmVCimgs32876_1353938977.jpg

Once I'm a little more knowledgeable on it all I'll probably make a decision. I might just get a second hand non VC Tamron as a stop-gap (I need to prioritise the 35 and 85 lengths over macro) then later on decide if I need to make the jump up to the new model, a Nikon or even a Zeiss (rarely do I shoot beyond 1:3 magnification with my current work).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom