Nikkor Macro 200mm f4 vs new Macro 105mm 2.8 - VR

Started Apr 30, 2006 | Discussions
Ultra77 Regular Member • Posts: 112
Nikkor Macro 200mm f4 vs new Macro 105mm 2.8 - VR

Hi all,

This is my first post in this group.

I have a Nikon D2Hs and I am considering the current model Nikkor Macro 200mm - f4 D lens.

Can some please post some examples and do you think it is worth waiting for a possible VR version like the new Nikkor Macro 105mm -f2.8 - VR

If I went for the new Macro 105mm I would get f2.8 over f4 and also VR and also AF-S. Not that most use A.F. for macro work.

I could use a T.C. for more reach if needed I guess but would prefer not to. Do you all think the picture quality is as good as I have read great things about the Macro 200mm - f4.

Do you still think the 200mm Macro f4 is a good but or is it outdated?

Pressureman Regular Member • Posts: 244
Re: Nikkor Macro 200mm f4 vs new Macro 105mm 2.8 - VR

I currently use a Sigma 180 mm macro. What I love about the lens is the fact that you get both a macro and a telelens in one package. In a zoo or out in the open that is an ideal mix, far more useful that having a macro and a 100 mm lens.

I can't tell you anything about the 200mm Micro but once Nikon announce a VR-version of this lens, it will be the replacement for my Sigma. VR is far more useful in a 200 mm lens then it is in a 100 mm short tele.

I have the luxury that I can wait a few years. The big question is whether you can wait for what will be the king of the macro lenses.

SiFu
SiFu Veteran Member • Posts: 5,943
...

Hi!

I do own the Nikkor 200 and the Sigma 180; both are virtually identical (allthough my copy of the Sigma is bad wide open) for closeup shots; here's a recent sample:

Regards
Alex

-- hide signature --

carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero

wackybit Senior Member • Posts: 1,058
Canon 500D (filter) on 70-200VR is most versatile

70-200VR with 500D is most versatile since you get AF-S, VR, Zoom, and macro

Check this thread where my photos are taken using the 70-200 VR and a 500D close up filter

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18166552

Using the filter reduces the farthest focus to 60cm (2ft) and closest focus to 30cm (1ft), which is about 1:2 or 1:1.5 reproduction ratio.....

-- hide signature --

You can now boot both Windows XP and Mac OS X on a single machine without a
hack!
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

And check this out! The coolest keyboard I've ever seen!
http://www.artlebedev.com/portfolio/optimus/

OP Ultra77 Regular Member • Posts: 112
Re: Canon 500D (filter) on 70-200VR is most versatile

wackybit wrote:

70-200VR with 500D is most versatile since you get AF-S, VR, Zoom,
and macro

Check this thread where my photos are taken using the 70-200 VR and
a 500D close up filter

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=18166552

Using the filter reduces the farthest focus to 60cm (2ft) and
closest focus to 30cm (1ft), which is about 1:2 or 1:1.5
reproduction ratio.....

Thanks for the link but from the images I have seem both on here and on PBase the Nikkor Macro 200mm f4 produces considerably sharper and more pleasing results.

It is just a lot of money for a Macro lens but I guess VR is unimportant for this type of work and you would not ever use AF with this type of photography. I have seen B.R.'s review of it and he claims it is one of the best Macro lenses ever made by Nikon

http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html

Clemens B. Regular Member • Posts: 173
Re: Nikkor Macro 200mm f4 vs new Macro 105mm 2.8 - VR

Hello,

I own the 200 Micro and considered the 105 some time ago but didn't bought it in the end because:
-)the 200 is a super small bit sharper, barely visible on D2X
-)the 200 has more reach, really comfortable with insects
-)VR is next to useless at 1:1 and 1:2
-)and so is AF(-S)

On the other hand, the 200 is heavier and it has the slowest AF I've ever seen on a Nikon lens. So if you want to use it for moving stuff quite often, you're better off with the 105.

I wouldn't consider the 70-200 + diopter lens as real macro option. It's nice if you need flexibility but in terms of optics, this combination is well below any Nikon Micro lens. My 200 f/4 beats my 70-200 at every distance and every aperture, more so with a diopter added. And always watch the diffraction-limits with macro lenses. Due to the enlarged image-circle it kicks in at bigger apertures than at infinity.

-- hide signature --

Clemens Bauer

nikonians Senior Member • Posts: 1,298
Slow AFS

I don't have the 200 just the 105VR and it has a slow AFS as well. I think its the fact that it has a lot of focus range or something like that thats why they are slow. The 12-24DX has a small turn in the focus, even in manual I have to turn the 105 a lot to go to both ends.

I'm still dying to see a head to head between the 200/4 and the 105VR.

I love this lense it's hard to take it off your camera super sharp great lense. I do not agree with you on the VR part as it does help a lot. Have not done 1:1 on it without a tripod as it's almost imposible, but anything other then 1:1 the VR works like a dream.

Regards,
JohnnyK

-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads