As my possibilities to travel exotic places are somewhat limited, I have decided to travel the macro world. And inspired by some of the intensely beautiful images seen here, i have made some initial efforts.

Results so far have not been up to expectations, but as a freshman, i am perfectly fine with that. My tool has been the Tamron AF 70-300 macro, the cheapest lens I have ever heard of. Should I continue trying to master this lens, or is it better to just throw in some money for a upgrade?

And, I am not going for the insect portrait, more the tiny world in general.

The camera bodies are Nikons, D 80, D7000, D700.

I also own a 1,4 Teleconverter.

Would be happy to get some opinions on this.

Best regards

Martin

 

Hi Martin,

My husband and I are not big fans of third party lenses, but we make one exception with the Sigma macro. They are just a sharp as the brand name, at a fraction of the cost. I realized they have also going up in price, like all the equipment, but you can perhaps look for an used one on Ebay, since they do not hold the value.

We particularly enjoyed the 150mm and the 180mm, but if you do not go for insects, the 105mm version should work for you. We used teleconvertes and extension tubes when needed.

I know the equipment does not make the photographer, but quality glass does help a lot.

Hope this helps!

HI Fabs,

thanks for reply!

Just found the thread related to this lens, and there is a review as well.

Looks as a good purchase, but not quite sure if the Nikon teleconverter would fit?

I guess it depends on your camera body. Best to research online before committing!

Martin,

 

Welcome to the macro forum. Traveling to exotic new locales through the viewfinder on the cheap, macro is indeed the ticket.

 

The lens you have isn't a true macro lens despite it being labeled as such. Lens manufacturers use the macro nomenclature on zooms because the lens in question can focus at closer distances then a normal zoom. In the case of your Tamron, the minimum focusing distance is 1.5 meters which produces a reproduction ratio of 1:4 or 1/4 magnification. True Macro lens have much closer minimum focusing distances (.5m or less) , and reproduction ratios of 1:1 or greater. At 1:1 magnification the lens captures the subject at it's actual size on the camera sensor or film plane.

 

Should you continue trying to master your lens? That depends on the magnification and resolution you want to achieve. We know macro lens can capture images at higher magnifications. Macro lens are also flat field lens. Virtually distortion free from corner-to-corner (no barrel or pin cushion effect from lens curvature) and have very low chromatic aberration. The result is an image at higher magnification, better resolution, sharpness and clarity. If this is what you are after, a macro lens is what you are looking for.

 

I shoot Canon but I am a bit of a gear hound so I keep up with Nikon equipment. I think the D7000 is best suited for most macro. Signal to noise is good and the extra pixels will allow you to crop for composition while still maintaining good pixel density (resolution) on the subject. D700 would be good for larger subjects/macroscapes.

 

A word about teleconvertors, anytime you add more glass to the optical path the image will take an IQ hit. Whether the degradation is acceptable or not is really a personal call. Teleconvertors are optimized by the manufacturers for their lens and often don't perform as well with other brands. I do not think your Nikon TC is going to play nicely with the Sigma Macro lens. On the bright side the jump from 1:4 to 1:1 is going to be huge step up in magnification. I don't think you'll be needing the TC anytime soon. That said if you keep at it there will come a day you're going to want to go beyond 1:1 and if you plan on using the 1.4 TC the Nikon 105 micro might be a better choice.

 

I have tried it a while ago as a friend of mine has the same and i was curious what it is about that lens. The optic is acceptable on the lower models like the D800 or D7000 and no doubt for that but on the D700 already some flaws came up. Not much for the quality at all but somebody like me who is used to use pro gear a lot could be write. But for the purpose you want it a good start.

 

As for a day use and my purpose the lens is too slow and when its got colder the AF has stopped working. The cheaper manufacturing way mirrors the price and liability.

 

But please don’t think much and go out shooting! Have fun and try to get the best what ever lens you use doesn’t matter.

 

Robert

 

Martin, i used Sigma with Nikon mount converter.

 

William, your answer is very comprehensive, and my decision is almost made.

It´ll be a 105 mm. Sigma or Nikon. And i ponder about the possibilities of using the teleconverter, have to check compatibility with both brands.

 

Robert, the Tamron was given to my by one of my sons, last winter.

I started out shooting cormorants at night in freezing cold, with handheld torch light,and the D80 body. ( I had some shots from this in my portfolio, but deleted as I want reprocess them)

Experiences from this started my equipment escapades:)

 

Fabs, I know from my Sigma 70-200, that the teleconverter doesn´t fit, but i could be different with the 150 and 180 mm. I will check:)

 

Fabs,William and Robert, Thanks for your input here and have a nice weekend!