Thinking about a Nikkor 85mm Micro

[luminary 0]

After the horrendous vis here in Tampa lately, I've pretty much decided I'm not going to be able to get by just with WA shooting for now. So I'm looking at macro choices for my D7000 / Aquatica rig. I'm really intersted in the Nikkor 85mm as it fits more what I would use it for topside and seems like it's a good trade off instead of buying both the 60 and 105 for underwater use.

 

A lot of the review sites don't seem that thrilled with it, but the few topside shooters I've found are mostly happy with it. The biggest comment I've seen about it is preferring to go with an f2.8 lens instead of the f3.5 that this is.

 

I could only find one or two threads here with people using it. Anyone have any feedback, hopefully with some sample shots?

 

Thanks!

[Don in Colorado 2]

I don't think most underwater photographers shoot macros at f2.8, or f3.5.

 

I think most underwater shooters shoot macros at f22, with blinding strobe lights, to get a little bit of depth of field.

 

Just my impression. YMMV

[luminary 0]

I don't think most underwater photographers shoot macros at f2.8, or f3.5.

 

I think most underwater shooters shoot macros at f22, with blinding strobe lights, to get a little bit of depth of field.

 

Just my impression. YMMV

 

That's often true topside too but the concern with f2.8 vs. f3.5 would be the available light while focusing. If I were going to just be using it above water, that difference wouldn't matter to me, but was curious about the impact underwater and if people care about the 2/3 stop difference.

[PRC 2]

The f2.8 will help with focus (but not nearly half as much as a decent focus light).

 

Vis here in the UK is continually poor and the 60mm has far more general use than the 105 due to the minimum focus distance advantage on the 60mm.

 

Topside macro then the 105 wins for me - but you don't get that much backscatter in the air - even in the UK, so subject to lens distance is less of an issue.

 

 

Paul C

[Aussiebyron 57]

It depends on what YOU call Horrendous VIS? If its really poor then I be suggesting the 60mm as there is less distance between lens and subject which means less crap in the water between you and the subject.

 

On the other hand, have you thought about the Tokina 100mm Macro?

 

It has recieved some interesting reviews: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/100mm-f28.htm (and was compared against the 85mm) and priced at $450!

 

At that price you can buy the older but still great Nikon 60mm AFD and the Tokina 100mm Macro and maybe even the Kenko 1.4x TC, all for the same cost a the Nikon 105mm VR??? Then you have it all covered.

 

Might as well buy the new Nikon 40mm Macro just for the hell of it as its only $280!

 

Gives something to think about.

 

Regards Mark

[divengolf 17]

On the other hand, have you thought about the Tokina 100mm Macro?

 

Regards Mark

 

Mark,

 

Glad that you mentioned that. I was not aware it existed. I've been looking at EBay for a used Nikon 105 VR at a decent price. This may be an ideal option. Ken's review was quite favorable to say the least. Do you know when it was introduced?

 

Have you used one or do you know anyone who has? I cannot find any threads on it here or on other sites. But that my be my lack of a search ability.

 

I also have an Aquatica housing (not a D7000 mind you). Wonder what extension ring would be required. The 100 seems to extend out a good bit in close up focus. May be a problem.

 

Thanks for the tip.

 

Harry

[Aussiebyron 57]

Hi Harry,

 

I havnt used one or seen one personally but I did find this posting: http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=36360

 

I would be presuming it would be like the old Nikon 105mm in regards to having lens extend when focusing close up. I would have to comfirm with Jean at Aquatica in what extension would be required but for the D7000 I would be guess around the #18453 which is the same for the Nikon AF 105mm (old style).

 

But I would like to hear from those that have it or used it their opinions.

 

Regards Mark

[john70490 3]

Visibility here in Sweden is usually not more than 4-5 m, often only about 2m, and almost everybody uses the 60mm lens almost all the time. I don't think you can beat it. The new 40mm Nikon lens will probably be just as good, and at a sensationally low price

[luminary 0]

It depends on what YOU call Horrendous VIS? If its really poor then I be suggesting the 60mm as there is less distance between lens and subject which means less crap in the water between you and the subject.

 

On the other hand, have you thought about the Tokina 100mm Macro?

 

It has recieved some interesting reviews: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tokina/100mm-f28.htm (and was compared against the 85mm) and priced at $450!

 

At that price you can buy the older but still great Nikon 60mm AFD and the Tokina 100mm Macro and maybe even the Kenko 1.4x TC, all for the same cost a the Nikon 105mm VR??? Then you have it all covered.

 

Might as well buy the new Nikon 40mm Macro just for the hell of it as its only $280!

 

Gives something to think about.

 

Regards Mark

 

OK, so not horrendous by what a lot of people on here deal with, but pretty miserable for what I'm used to. Was probably about 10' with a lot of large particulate in the water. I did consider the Tokina as well, but was concerned about the extension length on it.

 

I decided to give the 85 a try, ordered everything late last night. Will definitely give some feedback here once I get some time with it.

[divengolf 17]

Hi Harry,

 

I havnt used one or seen one personally but I did find this posting: http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=36360

 

I would be presuming it would be like the old Nikon 105mm in regards to having lens extend when focusing close up. I would have to comfirm with Jean at Aquatica in what extension would be required but for the D7000 I would be guess around the #18453 which is the same for the Nikon AF 105mm (old style).

 

But I would like to hear from those that have it or used it their opinions.

 

Regards Mark

 

Mark,

 

Thanks for the info. I emailed Jean yesterday about the proper ring. No response yet, but I'm sure he will respond. Their customer service is top notch.

 

I've also asked the US distributor for Tokina for the length of the lens fully extended. I've got the older style 105 (pre-VR), but the pics I've seen, the 100 seems to extend further. I'll wait for the expert to reply. But it's really hard to tell.

 

I've been following your threads on the D7000. I'm real envious. Hope to pop for one later this year.

 

All the best.

 

Harry

[divengolf 17]

Mark,

 

Thanks for the info. I emailed Jean yesterday about the proper ring. No response yet, but I'm sure he will respond. Their customer service is top notch.

 

I've also asked the US distributor for Tokina for the length of the lens fully extended. I've got the older style 105 (pre-VR), but the pics I've seen, the 100 seems to extend further. I'll wait for the expert to reply. But it's really hard to tell.

 

I've been following your threads on the D7000. I'm real envious. Hope to pop for one later this year.

 

All the best.

 

Harry

 

Mark,

 

Traded emails with Jean today. He does not have any experience with the lens and said that he has never been asked about it relative to use with Aquatica housings.

 

I'm still waiting on a reply from the Tokina US distributor. Jean was going to try to get the extended measurement through his sources as well.

 

Thanks.

 

Harry

[Aussiebyron 57]

Hi Harry.

 

I guess I didnt bother looking at the Tokina 100mm as I already have the old 105mm. Regarding the extension length of the Tokina, I think it will just come down to finding the already existing Aquatica extension and using that. Hopefully its one of the extension I already have.

 

I would be very interested if you get one and compare to the non VR lenses which we both have.

 

I am interested on how the 40mm Nikon Macro will go with the large AF Aquatica macro port. Hopefully its big enough to allow it to be used without an issue??

 

Regards Mark

[ATJ 1]

The viz around Sydney can be pretty poor, too, and I find the 60mm (I had the older 2.8D) works very well. I even sometimes use it inside a dome port (with +4 diopter to preserve the 1:1) to decrease the working distance for the same magnification.

[Edward Lai 36]

Hi All,

 

We have just returned from a trip to Club Paraiso, Cebu, the Philippines testing various equipment. Mounted our D7000 with the 85mm Micro and were very pleased with its result. It is much lighter than the 105mm VR Micro, and a bit easier for large subjects such as fish portrait, yet as good for fine macro. AF admittedly a tiny bit slower than the 105VR, but didn't notice any significant drop of brightness due to its smaller F3.5 aperture.

 

Here's a few photos:

 

 

 

 

And the entire gallery is here: http://nauticam.smugmug.com/HousingTests/N...18337024_jCtPSc

 

Edward

[luminary 0]

Hi All,

 

We have just returned from a trip to Club Paraiso, Cebu, the Philippines testing various equipment. Mounted our D7000 with the 85mm Micro and were very pleased with its result. It is much lighter than the 105mm VR Micro, and a bit easier for large subjects such as fish portrait, yet as good for fine macro. AF admittedly a tiny bit slower than the 105VR, but didn't notice any significant drop of brightness due to its smaller F3.5 aperture.

 

Edward

 

Great pics Edward, thanks for the feedback. I did end up getting the 85 and have my first dive with it tomorrow. Spent a couple hours in the pool last night getting familiar with it so hopefully can get some OK shots tomorrow.

[Edward Lai 36]

Great pics Edward, thanks for the feedback. I did end up getting the 85 and have my first dive with it tomorrow. Spent a couple hours in the pool last night getting familiar with it so hopefully can get some OK shots tomorrow.

 

Hi Luminary,

 

Thanks for visiting. Forgot to mention that some extreme macro shots were taken with a wet mounted diopter (I think it must be the Inon 6 or 7X one with 67mm thread).

 

Edward

[luminary 0]

Got underwater with my 85mm today. I really enjoy shooting with this lens, both topside and underwater. I was very happy with my results, considering it was only my second dive ever with a DSLR and the first time shooting macro. I don't have any experience with any other macro lens to compare to, but I was happy with this one. Got a thread in the gallery with a few images.

 

http://wetpixel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=42578