Macro lense question for D5000

[zoomjay]

I bought a D5000 last year for underwater photography with an Ikelite housing and strobe. Previously I had used an Olympus C4040 although it had gotten old and I wanted something more advanced. The lens I purchased to initially work with this was a Nikon 18-105 VR lens. I also picked up the domed port for the housing.

I did learn that while this is a good lens it is not the best lens for macro photography (the big fun is in the little stuff, right??). Anyway, I am not being recommended to purchased either a 105vr lens or a 60 afs lens. I also know that I will need a flat port to fit the housing.

I do have about 1000 dives under my belt - although mainly on our yearly trip to an island destination - so, simple and easy to use with good quality are important factors. With that said... which lens would be the best one for my purposes???

 

[slowhands]

The 60mm AF-s would be first, unless you need the extra working distance for shy critters. Then I'd get the 10-24 for big stuff. Good luck

 

[HerraduraDivers]

60mm for "generic" use and surge/current conditions
105mm for 15 cm./5.5 '' extra distance and calm conditions

12-24 Nikon (excellent but expensive) or 11-16 Tokina (excellent ad reasonable)

Some (including me) find the Nikkor 105mm micro VR to nervous and prone to hunting and be advised that the VR is useless on macro photography. The old Nikon 105mm micro may be a better choice but hard to find.

Chris

 

[euphros]

As you may already discern from the responses, there is a pattern emerging. For UW photography you basically need two very different types of lenses: a macro lens for small critters and a wide angle lens for everything else.

For macro purposes I use the older version Nikkor AF 105mm f/2.8D, which I consistently operate on manual mode. Don't get me wrong, the autofocus is fine, it is just that I prefer to focus manually-old habits die hard. I haven't had the chance of trying the VR yet; although I find Vibration Reduction indispensable in a lot of situations, I am not exactly sold on its usefulness for macro shooting. Add the extra cost of lens and new port, and you can probably see why I will be sticking with my old, non-VR 105mm for the forseeable future. The 60mm is also a good choice as a lot of people find it a bit easier to use; I prefer the 105mm for the extra working space it gives me, as it leaves more distance between me and my subject and (if I am not shooting on a rebreather) critters get far less jumpy from bubble noise and thus easier to follow with a lens. The 105mm is not a lens I would recommend with light heart however; it is a bit more 'nervous' than the 60mm as it has been mentioned already, but then again this may be extra incentive to perfect buoyancy skills. Also, keep in mind that the older non-VR version is only available as used or 'new old stock'-check ebay and you should find plenty, but be careful and make sure you evaluate the condition of the lens well.

My wide angle is the Tokina 11-16mm which I believe is a much, much better value than Nikkor's 12-24mm. Not only is it cheaper, but I consider it a much better lens than the 12-24mm, prticularly for lowlight or underwater use. Having the privilege of experiencing first hand both lenses, I found the Tokina a tid bit sharper, considerably cheaper, and with a distortion that is much easier to correct. It is also one mm wider (11 vs 12) than the Nikkor but most importantly it gives you a full extra stop and then some (at f/2.8 vs Nikkor's f/4). Given that underwater you need all the light and speed you can get out of a lens for the best results, I hope you can imagine how much of a difference a full stop can make on your photos. If there is a lens for which the term 'third-party' would be a totally a misleading description, this Tokina would be it.

I use the following ports:
For the Tokina 11-16mm, I use Ikelite's 8'' wide angle dome(5510.45), the corresponding port body extension(5510.22) and the zoom sleeve (5509.28).
For the Nikkor 105mm I use the specific made Ikelite port (5508.5) which allows for switching from manual to auto focus while underwater. There is also the option of using a flat port without manual focus capability and save about $50. Keep in mind that the VR lens has quite different port options as it is a considerably larger lens.

That's my two cents.

 

[scottfiji]

For your 1st macro lens, get the 60mm lens. Have fun!

 

[zoomjay]

thanks for the input... one (perhaps) silly question: do either (or both) of these lenses require the "close up" filter that my current 18-105 does?? This was a nasty surprise I learned last year upon my first series of dives with it (yes, it is what I get for not, exactly, reading all of the directions)..

 

[scottfiji]

>> The lens I purchased to initially work with this was a Nikon 18-105 VR lens.

that is too funny! (you'll understand why when you try your new lens)

>> do either (or both) of these lenses require the "close up" filter

definitely not.

 

[zoomjay]

one more silly question.... the 60's I see vary... I see:

60 AF-S micro f2.8 G ED and
60 AF-S macro f2.8 D

I am thinking that the "macro" one can focus closer... although the descriptions are not, exactly clear.... it is the macro I want... or are they all the same???

 

[euphros]

First things first, there are no silly questions. Trying to figure out any letter coding can be quite a task, and if you thing it is difficult with lenses, try it with Japanese motorcycles...

'Micro' is Nikon's word for macro-capable lenses. It's just their thing, if you see the word 'micro' on any lens made by Nikon, it means that it can be used for macro work.

Now, judging from what you have put down about the two 60mm lenses, here's my best guesstimates:

60 AF-S micro f2.8 G ED = 2008-present model (Nikon 60mm AF-S f/2.8 G ED (N) Micro-Nikkor)

In case you care, this means a 60mm micro(= macro)-capable Nikkor(=Nikon) lens with AF(=autofocus ability), S(=silent wave motor, making less noise while focusing) G(=gelded aperture ring, meaning NO aperture ring), ED(extra-low dispension glass) and N(=nanocrystal coating) features. The 'N' is actually printed on the lens and usually does not appear with the rest of the name.

60 AF-S macro f2.8 D = 1993-2008 model, with several cosmetic and functional differences from the aforementioned 2008-present model which replaced it. (Nikon 60mm AF f/2.8 D Micro-Nikkor). It is almost identical to the 1989-1993 non-D model which it replaced. There is no 60mm AF-S micro lens with the 'D' feature, and given the 'macro' (instead of Nikon's 'micro') word used I am inclined to believe that this lens is the older model. The 'D' feature has to do with flash use and exposure settings, an it is not menioned anymore, although all newer versions of Nikon's lenses (like the newer version of the 60mm micro) have it.

Here's a brief rundown of the differences. I will use AF-D for the older lens and AF-S for the newer one.

Cosmetic/Appearance/construction:
1.AF-D: white lettering, AF-S gold lettering.
2. The AF-D is about an inch shorter when fully retracted(not-zoomed in) and about the same length with the AF-S when fully zoomed in. The AF-S does not change size, as it is an IF (internal focusing) lens and anything that need to move for focusing or zooming purposes does so internally.
3. The AF-D is somewhat heavier than the AF-S (more metal parts like the filter threads). Do a google image search (with the correct names) and you'll probably see that they look quite different from each other.
4. The AF-S looks more like your 18-105mm, while the AF-D looks a bit 'older'.
5.The AF-S does not have a manual aperture ring (remember it is a 'G' lens) while the AF-D does. It really does not matter, unless you need to use the lens with film cameras someday. The D5000 will not let you use the feature anyway, and you can only control aperture settings (f stops) electronically (the 'A' mode on your top dial if I am not horribly mistaken).

Functional:
1. The AF-D has about an extra inch(and then some) of working distance (meaning that you can use it for full macro one etxtra inch further away from the subject) in comparison to the AF-S. In comparison, a 105mm will have about a foot of extra working distance form both with obvious results in your ability to properly light your subjects.
2.The AF-S is much easier to switch from Auto to Manual focus as you just need to twist the ring. The AF-D has a lock you need to operate before switching to using the manual focus ring. It can be a pain underwater.
3. At f/2.8 the AF-S has noticeably more falloff (dark corners) than the AF-D.
4. At f/2.8 the AF-S can be noticeably sharper than the AF-D, which is still quite sharp and ouperforms most third party 60mm macro lenses.
5. The AF-D can be significantly cheaper than the AF-S.


Hope this helps.

 

[Viz'art]

All theory aside, One aspect of the D5000 that is bound to influence your choice is the fact that the D5000 does not have a built in motor in the body for AF such as its more expensive sibling, so whatever lenses you select should at least be able to focus on your camera, look for lense that have an integrated focusing motor (AF-S with Nikon, HSM with Sigma...)

I'd say for Macro go for the Nikon 60mm AF-S, this way you have the choice of both AF and Manual and get a decent focus light (not a dive light) that will help focusing a great deal in low light situation.