Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

Started Apr 12, 2006 | Discussions
Vu Ho Regular Member • Posts: 143
Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

I've had the 105mm VR Micro on pre-order for a very good price. The problem is that I'm getting impatient. Not to mention that I can buy one locally right now, but it would cost me about $130 more.

For those who are fortunate enough to own one, is it worth the price in terms of value? The current market price is $829.99 on-line.

As I wait for this lens, I'm starting to wonder if the Sigma 150mm would be a better deal. It will cost me $200 less than my pre-order price and $330 less for my instant gratification price.

I want a macro lens to shoot flowers and insects. I prefer handheld if possible.

The Nikon VR and the shorter focal length seems to be the advantage over the Sigma in terms of handheld.

The Sigma would give me the extra distance for insects and save me at least $200.

Any personal comparision between the two would help greatly. And how is the Sigam 150mm handheld?

Solomon
Solomon Senior Member • Posts: 2,014
Re: Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

Hi Vu,

The 105VR I think will become a classic Nikkor lens. But, I would go with the Sigma. The sigma is an incredible lens in it's own right and you have the advantage of puting it to use immediately. At some later date, if you still feel you want to try the 105VR, you will find many eager buyers for your Sigma, because it has a stellar reputation. And at that future date, the 105VR's price may have settled down.

Go for the Sigma 150.
Regards,
Sol

Vu Ho wrote:

I've had the 105mm VR Micro on pre-order for a very good price. The
problem is that I'm getting impatient. Not to mention that I can
buy one locally right now, but it would cost me about $130 more.
For those who are fortunate enough to own one, is it worth the
price in terms of value? The current market price is $829.99
on-line.

As I wait for this lens, I'm starting to wonder if the Sigma 150mm
would be a better deal. It will cost me $200 less than my pre-order
price and $330 less for my instant gratification price.

I want a macro lens to shoot flowers and insects. I prefer handheld
if possible.

The Nikon VR and the shorter focal length seems to be the advantage
over the Sigma in terms of handheld.

The Sigma would give me the extra distance for insects and save me
at least $200.

Any personal comparision between the two would help greatly. And
how is the Sigam 150mm handheld?

 Solomon's gear list:Solomon's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Nikon D1X Nikon D2Hs Nikon D7000 Fujifilm X-E2 +9 more
AlbieSky Veteran Member • Posts: 3,338
Re: Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

You can get if for $799 at Cord Camera. I don't know if they have them in stock at the moment. Some other site had them for around $750, but I don't remember.

I don't know if it is worth it because I have never had macro lens before, let alone a lens with VR and the Nano coating. I don't regret buying it but I am definitely more careful hauling around my D70 when the darn lens costs as much as the camera body.

Like I mentioned in other posts, I wanted a macro lens and a possible portrait lens so I got the 105 instead of 2 lenses.

-- hide signature --

D 7 0 + 1 8 - 7 0, 5 0 f 1.4, 1 0 5 mm VR, S B 6 0 0
P S E 4, N C 4.4, N V

 AlbieSky's gear list:AlbieSky's gear list
Nikon 1 J1 Nikon 1 V2 Fujifilm X-T1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm F1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +10 more
MediumFormat Regular Member • Posts: 121
Re: Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

Vu, have you considered a 200mm micro instead of the 105?

Of all my top end Nikon lenses, the 200 is in a class by itself.

But a tripod is required which I have no problem with.

bibi0012 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,157
Re: Is the 105mm VR Micro worth it?

Judging by the photos I've seen so far, it definitely is one lens I would put my money into it, let alone waiting for it.

One hack of a lens! You will love it.

 bibi0012's gear list:bibi0012's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 J5 Fujifilm X-T20 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6 +3 more
maljo@inreach.com Veteran Member • Posts: 7,979
105 VR :: awfully nice lens

I think its worth it, but the Sigma and several other
macro lenses appear to be excellent as well.
I like the VR feature and the AF-S is fast and quiet.
One of those tough calls that ultimately doesn't matterj
much. The photos depend upon you more than the lens.
maljo

105 VR macro, Zion National Park:

 maljo@inreach.com's gear list:maljo@inreach.com's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Nikon D500 Nikon D850 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R
yunfat Contributing Member • Posts: 878
Re: 105 VR :: awfully nice lens

I've have both the Sigma 150 DG and 105mm VR... I will be selling the Sigma. The 105, despite less working distance, is much easier to handhold for macro. The sigma is an awesome lens though, I could never discourage someone from getting one, just I can't justify having both the 150 and the 105 in the bag. VR really does work at macro distances imho. Either way you can't go wrong.

(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 5,228
A few Originals with my 105 VR!

You may have seen this already. I think the 200 beats them all but you will def. need a tripod. Not sure about the 150 though! Might be better!
Anyway! Handheld with my D50

http://www.pbase.com/pierredubeau/butterfly

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads