Reading mode: Light Dark

Low-bud Z macro lens?

Go to last post
DVF Photography said:
sirhawkeye64 said:
DVF Photography said:
Hi y'all!

I'm looking for a decent macro lens for my Z6III, but I don't want to spend a lot of money on it since I only rarely shoot really up close & personal. Budget max €300 (~$320), but preferrably cheaper. Focal distance would not be much of an issue, so it doesn't matter that much if it's a 50mm or a 150mm - main importance is being able to get close and get a 1:1 ratio. AF is preferred, but not essential.

I really do prefer the Z mount, but since I do have two FTZs I'm open for F mount suggestions, but only if all else fails. Does anyone know if some 3rd party budget brand already has Z mount macros in their lineup?
Click to expand...
If you don't mind adapting, I'd recommend the AF-S Nikkor 105mm 2.8G lens (just bought one of these myself for $300 in excellent condition and while it's not as sharp as the Z version, it's also about 1/3 of the sale price of the 105 Z, plus I don't shoot a ton of macro so I didn't want to spend $850 on a macro lens either).

Otherwise I've heard good things about used Sigma 105's (about as sharp as the Nikon F 105), and you could even look into a Tokina 100mm macro (although I don't know if they work with the Z or not i didn't check but was aware they existed at least and you may be able to get one to work with the Z using manual focus and possible setting it up as non-CPU lens).

Otherwise beyond that you may have to go with manual focus third party options, or if you don't need 105mm, then maybe the 50 MC would be a good option, although a bit more than $300, but I think used you can find them for about $500. But the AF-S 105 macro would be my first choice in that price range (they range in price though from about $300-$450 depending on condition.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tips!

Right now I'm waiting for a set of extension tubes (due tomorrow), gonna try that first. If they ain't working to my liking, I'll probably end up with an adapted Nikon F-mount 105mm. Might just take a chance and go for the Ai version...
Click to expand...
I would maybe atl east get the older AF 105 macro (the "D" version) if you are going to go cheaper. While they cannot auto focus, I have heard they are decently sharp (not sure about the really old AI/AIS lenses though).

--
PLEASE NOTE: I usually unsubscribe from forums and comments after a period of time, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. Feel free to PM me if you have a questions or need clarification about a comment I made.
 
Last edited:
Another way to dip your toe into the water here is the Raynox DCR-250. I use this on my Z50 and 50-250 and the results are pretty mindblowing with stunning image quality and massive magnification. It has the advantage of clipping on the end of the lens, so you can do macro when out and about, then slip it off for normal photos very easily. I think some people here combine it with extension tubes too. Probably the best value thing I ever bought for my Z50 in terms of the fun I've had with it.
 
JasonMulvern said:
Another way to dip your toe into the water here is the Raynox DCR-250. I use this on my Z50 and 50-250 and the results are pretty mindblowing with stunning image quality and massive magnification. It has the advantage of clipping on the end of the lens, so you can do macro when out and about, then slip it off for normal photos very easily. I think some people here combine it with extension tubes too. Probably the best value thing I ever bought for my Z50 in terms of the fun I've had with it.
Click to expand...
Could you show us some sample shots from 50-250 with Raynox 250?
 
Last edited:
Allrighty then! Just got the Viltrox extension tubes delivered, so this is just a quick test.

The Viltrox tubes are extremely light, but solid enough. Body is plastic, mounts are metal. You get a 12mm and a 24mm tube. Mounting goes kinda stiff, but again solid. Everything works as it should. Autofocus, focus peaking, you name it - it's all there.

The Viltrox tubes are extremely light, but solid enough. Body is plastic, mounts are metal. You get a 12mm and a 24mm tube. Mounting goes kinda stiff, but again solid. Everything works as it should. Autofocus, focus peaking, you name it - it's all there.

Okay - the camera is the Nikon Z6III, the lens is the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Di III VXD.
All shots are taken with f/2, 1/30s, ISO-400, 35mm. First shot is taken without any tube, second with the 12mm tube, third with the 24mm tube. I didn't bother to adjust exposure with every tube, I wanted all three shots to be with the exact same exif data.

Meet Homer, our house gnome.

First shot, taken with just the lens - no tubes. Distance: 33cm (minimal focus distance of this lens)

First shot, taken with just the lens - no tubes. Distance: 33cm (minimal focus distance of this lens)

Second shot, taken with the 12mm tube. Shooting distance: 6cm (!)

Second shot, taken with the 12mm tube. Shooting distance: 6cm (!)

And third shot, taken with the 24mm tube. Distance: 3.5cm (!!!)

And third shot, taken with the 24mm tube. Distance: 3.5cm (!!!)

Couldn't get Homer to do some proper posing, for some reason he's been grumpy since Christmas ;-)
Next couple of days I will be out shooting at some more interesting stuff. I will test some different lenses as well, but I expect to se the 35-150 the most.

But even this quick test does make me happy in terms of close quarters shooting and sharpness! So far, me happy!

--
Tempestas Furit Cum Omni Vi
Tempestas In Capite Meo
 
Last edited:
With extension tubes it’s best to close down the aperture to get sharper results. I’ve used extension tubes with my lenses, and the shorter the focal length, the greater the magnification you will get. On my Z 50/1.2S it’s perfect, but on my Plena it reduces the minimum focus distance just enough so I can get even closer shots. But again, closing the aperture will give you better results - otherwise you start getting softer images shooting wide open.
 
Alberto Tanikawa said:
With extension tubes it’s best to close down the aperture to get sharper results. I’ve used extension tubes with my lenses, and the shorter the focal length, the greater the magnification you will get. On my Z 50/1.2S it’s perfect, but on my Plena it reduces the minimum focus distance just enough so I can get even closer shots. But again, closing the aperture will give you better results - otherwise you start getting softer images shooting wide open.
Click to expand...
Thanx for the tips! I'll have to find out by trial and error which lens will function best with the tubes.The 35-150 does look promising (and indeed I already noticed when I was fiddling around this afternoon that the wide end works better than the tele end), but I do have more glass in the bag ;-)
 
phinix said:
Could you show us some sample shots from 50-250 with Raynox 250?
Click to expand...
Sure, I've uploaded some to a new album in my profile. Sorry these are from my phone's camera roll as they're last summer, so missing meta data and probably recompressed (also all JPEGs), but you'll get an idea of what you can do. They all have the following in common:

Nikon Z50, 50-250DX lens and Raynox.

They're handheld using manual focus and mostly stacked in Helicon, so given the limitations of this method on the Z50 and my middle-aged shaking arms, please don't roast me over artefacts etc.

Also I went nowhere near the max magnification of this setup because, handheld, I don't have the skill set to do it, the depth of field is so minute.


Making the assumption these represent the lowest quality you'd get, hopefully this shows what this ultra-cheap setup would be capable of in more skilled hands, or more controlled settings (tripod, better light, focus shifting, static subject etc).
 
Hi y'all!

As promised I did some more fiddling with the extension tubes. Took a couple of shots with the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 and the 24mm tube.

In post-processing I noticed that it would probably have been better to use a narrower aperture (like Alberto already suggested...). But I didn't bring my tripod, so I had to cope by hand, and thus use a faster shutter speed.

In post-processing I noticed that it would probably have been better to use a narrower aperture (like Alberto already suggested...). But I didn't bring my tripod, so I had to cope by hand, and thus use a faster shutter speed.

It almost looks like the stamens and pollen are aglow...

It almost looks like the stamens and pollen are aglow...

I love all the details I was able to get on the bee, like the pollen on his legs and face, and the hair on his chest and back. The little fellow was nice enough to stay put and pose while I was up close and personal with him. The lens front was about 8cm away from him.

I love all the details I was able to get on the bee, like the pollen on his legs and face, and the hair on his chest and back. The little fellow was nice enough to stay put and pose while I was up close and personal with him. The lens front was about 8cm away from him.

So far, very happy with the results, and good enough for me to work with! Saves me a heap of money buying a macro lens ;-)

--
Tempestas Furit Cum Omni Vi
Tempestas In Capite Meo
 
Last edited:
MasterOfGoingFaster said:
DVF Photography said:
Hi y'all!

I'm looking for a decent macro lens for my Z6III, but I don't want to spend a lot of money on it since I only rarely shoot really up close & personal. Budget max €300 (~$320), but preferrably cheaper.
Click to expand...
Consider a set of Z-mount extension tubes. Inexpensive, and you'll have AF if you get ones with electrical contacts.
MasterOfGoingFaster said:
I really do prefer the Z mount, but since I do have two FTZs I'm open for F mount suggestions, but only if all else fails.
Click to expand...
There are lots of used 90 to 105mm F-mount macro lenses out there. I like the 105/2.8 Ais manual focus. A 200/4 Ais is a great lens I really enjoy. But for some reason everyone seems to be able to make a good 90 to 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. So Sigma, Tamron, etc. should all work well.

I have not had good experience with any of the small brands from China, but I've only tried one, so my experience is very limited.
Click to expand...
 
phenix jc said:
MasterOfGoingFaster said:
DVF Photography said:
Hi y'all!

I'm looking for a decent macro lens for my Z6III, but I don't want to spend a lot of money on it since I only rarely shoot really up close & personal. Budget max €300 (~$320), but preferrably cheaper.
Click to expand...
Consider a set of Z-mount extension tubes. Inexpensive, and you'll have AF if you get ones with electrical contacts.
phenix jc said:
I really do prefer the Z mount, but since I do have two FTZs I'm open for F mount suggestions, but only if all else fails.
Click to expand...
There are lots of used 90 to 105mm F-mount macro lenses out there. I like the 105/2.8 Ais manual focus. A 200/4 Ais is a great lens I really enjoy. But for some reason everyone seems to be able to make a good 90 to 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. So Sigma, Tamron, etc. should all work well.

I have not had good experience with any of the small brands from China, but I've only tried one, so my experience is very limited.
Click to expand...
Sorry but no, the 200/4 ais isn't a great lens on digital. Unfortunately, it's a mediocre lens.

Compared to what ? Compared to the modern offering (150/180/200) and some of them are cheap used.

The 200/4 AFD on the other side is still one of the greatest in 2025.
Click to expand...
The 200 f/4 AFD is not a budget lens though.... even used. I've seen the price on some of the Sigma 100mm macros for F-mount drop relatively low (like $200) and the Nikon 105 F-mount (the AF-S version) is around $300-$350). I think that's probably about as budget as one would want to get, if they valued AF at least. Otherwise I'm sure there are cheaper manual focus lenses from third parties would be the only other option I can think of (short of using an APSC macro lens but you lose a lot of resolution doing that). I'd still say the best cheap one is the AFD 105 2.8 lens (for f-mount). You can find them under $200, but they won't AF with the Z system obviously (but they will with the DSLRs that have the built-in focus motor) and the sharpness (i felt) was decent (the AF-S version was better obviously).

--
PLEASE NOTE: I usually unsubscribe from forums and comments after a period of time, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. Feel free to PM me if you have a questions or need clarification about a comment I made.
 
Last edited:
If you want AF, around 300€, I think F mount options are the only ones that you can afford.

The best one I found on MPB within your budget is an old Sigma Macro lens

d4c5f30b3da447a7b9f62c5bd948fcb6.jpg.png


It can do 1:1 macro, which is nice. Optics seems to be pretty sharp, but this is an old lens for sure, it was released back in 2011.

The excellent Nikkor 85mm f/3.5 Micro is also within your budget, but that's a DX lens. Not the best pairing with a Z6III.



[Edit : I just realized this is a pretty old post (3 weeks old...) and that OP already settled on macro tubes. Oh well !]

--
(G.A.S. and collectionnite will get my skin one day)
 
Last edited:
Glad it worked out, and nice shots!
 
phenix jc said:
MasterOfGoingFaster said:
There are lots of used 90 to 105mm F-mount macro lenses out there. I like the 105/2.8 Ais manual focus. A 200/4 Ais is a great lens I really enjoy. But for some reason everyone seems to be able to make a good 90 to 105mm f/2.8 macro lens. So Sigma, Tamron, etc. should all work well.
Click to expand...
Sorry but no, the 200/4 ais isn't a great lens on digital. Unfortunately, it's a mediocre lens.

Compared to what ? Compared to the modern offering (150/180/200) and some of them are cheap used.

The 200/4 AFD on the other side is still one of the greatest in 2025.
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing your opinion. Mine was a shock. I expected it to be mediocre, but it is actually quite fantastic when used properly. I have 7 macro lenses including the Z 105/2.8. I stand by my statement. Perhaps the one you used got knocked around, or mine is the odd one. Not sure, but mine is great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AWG_Pics
My transition to Z bodies
2
Replies
25
Views
14K
Rich Rosen
R
Stockholmed-in-BadMusic
Panasonic Lumix S5II vs Nikon Z5II + L-mount vs Z-mount
Replies
14
Views
64K
RBIV
RBIV
C
Viltrox E-Z vs Megadap ETZ21: first notes
Replies
18
Views
47K
wjan
wjan
Richard Murdey
Nikon's Z-lens portfolio, a alternate perspective
Replies
6
Views
6K
msu79gt82
M
MrHollywood
Nikon's BEST Bodies
2
Replies
23
Views
59K
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top