105 or 60mm Macro?

[lifeisfullofgooddives]

I am having trouble deciding which one to get?

I am currently only using a P & S underwater until I can afford to house my D50. But I was woundering which of these 2 lenses will be the most benificial for both Land & Sea?

 

[Warren_L]

Someone was asking me this just this morning.... here is basically what I said.


As for macro, I recommend the 60mm micro because it is a bit easier to use than the 105mm micro (which is also very popular for uw macro). The 60mm has a shorter working distance (i.e. to do 1:1 macro you need to be a bit closer to your subject) than the 105mm, but both will do 1:1 closeup. The benefit of the 60mm micro is you can do fish/animal portraits as well, since in non-macro mode, it is not really much of a telephoto that you can fill the frame easily, whereas on the 105mm, you'd have to be really far back, and that really kills the lighting. So with the 105mm you're shooting macro only. With the 60mm, you have a lot of flexibility - macro or portrait.

I prefer the 105mm micro when doing super macro (you can add a diopter to get you even closer), but I would only get this as a second macro lens, and go with the 60mm first.

 

[OceanObsessed]

Someone asked the same question a while back. You will find alot of information on this here:
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=142809&highlight=60mm+105mm+macro

 

[cneal]

I am having trouble deciding which one to get? :

Two lenses capable of 1:1, but of different focal lengths will produce the identical photograph at 1:1. One millimeter of reality is one millimter on the sensor or film. The diffference is distance from the sensor or film to the subject. With the longer focal length lens you will not be as close and will have a better chance with that garden eel. The trade off is you will not have as wide a field of view at infinity focus.

Another thing to remember is that the newer lens designs will alter the focal length as they aproach 1:1. Read the spec sheets closely. That 105-G mm lens may not be 105 mm at 1:1. As more of the camera functions have become computer controlled variables such as aperture and focal length have ceased to be constants.

 

[jcclink]

If you're into macro photography you will eventually end up with both 60 & 105 lenses. The new 105VR lets you do manual focus without changing menu settings, or switches on camera/lens. Just need a useable focus gear.

 

[Mo2vation]

If you're into macro photography you will eventually end up with both 60 & 105 lenses. The new 105VR lets you do manual focus without changing menu settings, or switches on camera/lens. Just need a useable focus gear.

People are dumping their 105's to move to the VRs - eBay is full of very good condition, very cheap 105's right now.

I dived the 60mm for about a year and took thousands and thousands of Macros with it.

I moved to the 105 a couple of months ago and its changed my life! Shots I couldn't dream of capturing last year are a breeze with the 105. That said, its NOT the gear. I'm sure I'm able to do some very cool stuff with the 105 because I honed my chops on 7,000 or 9,000 shots with the 60 - learning to get very close and very still in low viz surgey SoCal shore dives to get clear shots at 1/60.

I've done some great fish portraits with the 105 and stupid macro at 1/500 with frame-filling fishie eyeball stuff.

With the 60, I had more choices. The only thing I couldn't shoot with it was WA. With the 105, its too much lens for about 80% of the shots I could possibly take, and just the ticket for 100% of the stuff I love - the crazy macros.

You will wind up with both. You will love both. The 60 is more versatile - like a nice set of very sharp binoculars. The 105 is a friggen telescope.

On land, I never use the 60. I do use the 105 a lot, though.

---
Ken

 

[lifeisfullofgooddives]

thanks for all the great advice!

I think my mind is made up on which lense to get, unless of course I can manage to buy both of them at the same time...

My other question is do you think Nikon will redesign the 60mm anytime soon? I mean they just did the 105mm, so if they are going to do that should Iwait for the redesigned version or should I be looking into picking one up now....


thanks for all the great advice!

 

[Mo2vation]

thanks for all the great advice!

I think my mind is made up on which lense to get, unless of course I can manage to buy both of them at the same time...

My other question is do you think Nikon will redesign the 60mm anytime soon? I mean they just did the 105mm, so if they are going to do that should Iwait for the redesigned version or should I be looking into picking one up now....


thanks for all the great advice!

Market won't support it.

The 105 retailed for over $900 before VR... adding very expensive VR technology to the lens wasn't too far of a leap. Plus, a long heavy lens like this benefits greatly from VR.

The 60 is sharp, clean, light and cheap. Why add hundreds to it for VR, when the benefits will only be marginal?

I wouldn't wait. The 60 isn't going through any dramatic changes anytime soon, IMO.

---
Ken

 

[dbh]

I think Nikon will come out with some new lenses usable with the D40 (motor in the lens). I cannot predict if it will be a redesigned 60 or various zooms. PMA is the first of March if you can wait.

Dave

 

[lifeisfullofgooddives]

for the quick feedback!

I guess I have to go shopping this weekend to see what the camera stores are selling these babies at.

again thanks everyone for the help