Nikon 85mm VR Micro vs. 105mm VR Micro

gowiththeflow

I've been wishing for a 105mm VR Micro for a while, but the new 85mm Micro has got me seriously tempted. I currently have a 16-85mm VR, 70-300mm VR, and 35mm AF-S. The 85mm sounds like it would be a good compromise- a good focal length for portraits as well as macro shots, smaller size, ~1/2 the weight, ~1/2 the price, and most likely very good IQ. I can pick up the 85mm for under $450, so it's very, very tempting...

My question is if the loss of 2/3 stop will cause problems, either not being 'fast' enough for portraits, or not being able to get shallow enough DOF for both portraits and macros. I know no one has gotten their hands on one yet (or at least hasn't admitted to it online), but does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Qarik

gowiththeflow wrote:

I've been wishing for a 105mm VR Micro for a while, but the new 85mm Micro has got me seriously tempted. I currently have a 16-85mm VR, 70-300mm VR, and 35mm AF-S. The 85mm sounds like it would be a good compromise- a good focal length for portraits as well as macro shots, smaller size, ~1/2 the weight, ~1/2 the price, and most likely very good IQ. I can pick up the 85mm for under $450, so it's very, very tempting...

My question is if the loss of 2/3 stop will cause problems, either not being 'fast' enough for portraits, or not being able to get shallow enough DOF for both portraits and macros. I know no one has gotten their hands on one yet (or at least hasn't admitted to it online), but does anyone have any thoughts on this?

because of the fstop..it will never be a great portrait lens. Perhaps a good one though. I wouldn't worry about size as a consideration. It is well priced though.

gowiththeflow

Qarik wrote:

because of the fstop..it will never be a great portrait lens. Perhaps a good one though. I wouldn't worry about size as a consideration. It is well priced though.

Thanks! I can settle for 'good', I'm buying it primarily for macro shooting, that it happens to be a good focal length for portrait shooting and has VR is just a bonus. I'm not worried about the size and weight while shooting so much as in the camera bag- I've played with the 105mm VR in a store, and it felt very fat and very heavy, though certainly extremely well built!

For the price I'm looking at, I think I'd be a fool to turn it down. I really like macro shooting, and it's hard to get decent results without a dedicated macro lens. Hopefully it won't take months to arrive like the 35mm AF-S.

ziggy53

gowiththeflow wrote:

I've been wishing for a 105mm VR Micro for a while, but the new 85mm Micro has got me seriously tempted. I currently have a 16-85mm VR, 70-300mm VR, and 35mm AF-S. The 85mm sounds like it would be a good compromise- a good focal length for portraits as well as macro shots, smaller size, ~1/2 the weight, ~1/2 the price, and most likely very good IQ. I can pick up the 85mm for under $450, so it's very, very tempting...

My question is if the loss of 2/3 stop will cause problems, either not being 'fast' enough for portraits, or not being able to get shallow enough DOF for both portraits and macros. I know no one has gotten their hands on one yet (or at least hasn't admitted to it online), but does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Gowiththeflow, welcome to the Digital Grin.

I have never seen a really bad "true" macro lens. A slower lens may not be as versatile, so that might be more of a consideration. If you are truly wanting a lens for portraiture then you might give other attributes some thought too, like the shape of the diaphragm blades, which could also affect use.

The new 85mm Macro is also a DX lens which would not be ideal on a FF body, if that's a consideration.

I always recommend waiting when it involves a new lens or body. Early adopters are the ones to suffer if there are any problems, but I have no doubt that Nikon would make it right if something should happen.

I am also compelled to remind you that there are some very good true macro lenses in a similar price range. In particular, the Tamron 90mm, f2.8 Di SP is a very good macro lens and it has the f2.8 aperture and is compatible with FF bodies. (It doesn't have VR (II) or fast focus however.)

gowiththeflow

ziggy53 wrote:

I am also compelled to remind you that there are some very good true macro lenses in a similar price range. In particular, the Tamron 90mm, f2.8 Di SP is a very good macro lens and it has the f2.8 aperture and is compatible with FF bodies. (It doesn't have VR (II) or fast focus however.)

Good to know. That and the Sigma 105mm DG look good, though I do prefer to stick with Nikkor lenses, personally. I guess I could overlook my prejudice towards AF-S too, since you hardly need AF for macros most of the time.

No worries about it being DX, I'm not seeing a D700 anywhere in the near future... unless they bring FX down to the D300's price point, I'll be quite fine with a crop sensor. I like FX lenses for the better IQ on DX and compatibility, but it's not a deal breaker.

NikonsandVstroms

gowiththeflow wrote:

Good to know. That and the Sigma 105mm DG look good, though I do prefer to stick with Nikkor lenses, personally. I guess I could overlook my prejudice towards AF-S too, since you hardly need AF for macros most of the time.

No worries about it being DX, I'm not seeing a D700 anywhere in the near future... unless they bring FX down to the D300's price point, I'll be quite fine with a crop sensor. I like FX lenses for the better IQ on DX and compatibility, but it's not a deal breaker.

It is all a balance but expect your lens to last you at least through a few bodies if you take care of it, so even if you have DX now and might even get the next body in the DX format that lens might still be working great.

Now you do need to weight this against your needs in the moment, but do think long term about any lens purchase.

gowiththeflow

NikonsandVstroms wrote:

It is all a balance but expect your lens to last you at least through a few bodies if you take care of it, so even if you have DX now and might even get the next body in the DX format that lens might still be working great.

True, but hopefully I won't be buying an FX until I have enough for the appropriate lenses! Of course, it took all of a year to decide to upgrade from the D60 that was 'good enough' last year to a D90, so who knows how long it'll be before we 'have' to buy a D700 (or whatever the next D700 is).

I think given what I'm spending on this one, I'll have a hard time not enjoying it for now, and getting most/all of my $ back whenever it's time to sell it.