looking to buy nikon 105 macro lens but I am not

[sluggo 0]

sure which one, there seems to be several, old and new, auto focus,non auto focus. We will be using this underwater and what a macro lens. We have a 10-17 Tokina fisheye and what to add to the collection.

[PRC 2]

Look at the latest 105, while the VR is not a lot of use in the water it works well on land. Optically the current 105 is good and the best bit is the fast (HSM) focusing system.

 

The older versions of this lens with the slower motors were not so great to use in the water.

 

FWIW many use only autofocus with this lens (in the water), saving money on the port requirement.

 

Paul C

[ChrigelKarrer 52]

sluggo,

the Nikon 105mm macro or Tokina 100mm is a excellent good lens for shy creatures and/or mury water,

but difficult to use in surge or current conditions and the VR is useless under water.

Some people complain about the 105VR Micro that it is hunting as i is too quick to acquire focus,

but this may depend on the Camera you are using. I had the 105mm Micro NON VR and it find it not particularly slow,

and i personally prefer that it is not too quick under water.

Chris

[cor 0]

Been using the old 105 for over 10 years. Nothing wrong with it. But if id buy a 105 now, id buy the new one if my port system fit it (it's a big lens).

[eric black 1]

Ive owned and used them both- prefer the older version as the slower hunting is invaluable when doing very high magnification work- the other hunts too fast and can be hard to see where the actual stop needs to be for stopping and switching out to a manual approach. If your just going after non-micro stuff like fish portraits, Id go with the newer one as the hunting thing isnt as important as fast focus (prior to the fish tucking tail and running) in that case

my 5 cents

[Deep6 7]

sure which one, there seems to be several, old and new, auto focus,non auto focus. We will be using this underwater and what a macro lens. We have a 10-17 Tokina fisheye and what to add to the collection.

I have the older Nikkor 60 & 105 mm macro lenses. I use the 60 or Sigma 17-70 macro on night dives. I prefer the 105 for day time if the vis. permits. I use a Nexus multi-port that allows shifting the lens between AF & MF. Both of the Nikkor macros work with the older Kenko 1.4X Pro 300 TC.

 

(Old) Bob

[Stoo 42]

I have the newer version of the 105 and use it on a D90 and D7000. On the cropped sensor, it can be a tricky thing to focus if you are moving around in surge etc. I will add that I often use the manual focus to play with DoF. It's a great lens when the water is right.

 

I also use the 60mm macro and if I had to choose one or the other, I would probably go with the 60... It's just more versatile. I was in T+C three days after Hurricane Irene blew through. The vis was crap and a lot of movement in the water. The 60 saved the trip...

Edited March 6, 2012 by Stoo

[diverdad 7]

This is an interesting discussion as the wife has said she is going to buy me a 105mm lens for my birthday.

We were at the focus on imaging show in Birmingham last weekend and I had a good luck at 3 lenses.

 

Tamron 90mm - the shroud to change from AF to manual just will not work with my Ikelite housing and I am not going to get in the water without the option to change between the two.

 

Sigma 105mm - Nice lens, we have a couple of sigma lenses already and I like them.

Nikkor 105mm - Again, a nice lens with good reviews and a pedigree name.

 

The size of the lenses means I am going to have to invest in a flat port for my Ikelite housing. It is a bit of a whopper.

 

I guess it boils down to what deal we can get as to which lens I will get.

 

Anyone got any views on the Sigma 105's performance underwater?

 

Lee

[tdpriest 115]

Just to say that I've used the new Nikon 105 VR for several years and it's worked pretty well, even with diopters/close-up lenses. It's a swine to point in the right direction, though: the small field of view takes some getting used to!

 

I would recommend lots of terrestrial practice or even using a 60mm micro lens before depending on the 105 underwater.

 

Tim

 

[TomR1 5]

I use the newer 105. First I had an Ikelite port, then a Seatool. Neither allowed manual focus. The lens does work in supermacro mode (http://www.tomandginnie.com/Wakatobi_in_Super_macro.html): This web page tells how.

[Stoo 42]

I'm just back from a week at Turneffe... mostly drift diving. I used the 105 on one dive... and not again. It was just too tough to get proper focus as i went drifting by.

 

On the other hand, I used the 60 to get everything from Eagle Rays to nudibranchs. I used it on pretty much every dive, unless I was using my 10-17.

 

If I am ever forced to travel light, I'm taking the 60 and the 10-17 and leaving the rest at home...

Edited March 22, 2012 by Stoo

[segon 0]

Anyone got any views on the Sigma 105's performance underwater?

 

I used Sigma 105mm macro for about a year. It was a bit slow to focus underwater with my D90. But I got used to it and actually I loved the lens. It's been a year since I switched to Nikon 105mm micro VR. After my first dive with Nikon 105mm I sold the Sigma lens. There was no way back. Nikon is simply better.

[Magrone 9]

I don't know why people are saying the VR is "useless" under water. I quote the VR product description: "The VRII offers a stable viewfinder image for easy frame composition even at high magnification shooting." I find this feature very helpful when composing at 1:1 and beyond. I feel that this feature alone sets it apart from other lenses. I love the VR, The hunting is a bit much in low light, but it's FAST. When doing Super macro work all you have to do is use it to get you subject somewhat in focus anyway, then switch to manual and rock back and forth, then focus bracket fire away. I prefer shooting the 60 with a fiber optic snoot and the 105VR with the Subsee +10.

[Swimmersible 0]

Go for it. The VR really helps.

[Allcityloan 0]

I too using sigma 105 .its really amazing