Hi Thomas
Having just upgraded my micro equipment I have this advices. If your main
subject are insects the 200/4 would be a great but expensive choice - itīs
very sharp and made to shoot insects.
80-200 with a 5T or 6T is imo not the best choice imhop since the subject to
film distance would be rather short - which is bad when we talk about
insects - moreover the edges will become rather soft.
The 70-180 do not go "one to one" - only 1:1.32. But itīs quit flexible
though - and sharp - a good but expensive choice.
The good thing about micro lenses in the 200mm range is imho also the bad
thing - the narrow angle makes it dificult to include som background in
order to gain some depht. For "micro" I often use micro 55/3,5, 24/2,8,
28/2,8 or 50/1,8 - and yesterday I upgraded my equipment with the pk11a,
pk12 and pk13 - I canīt wait to go shooting this weekend
Kim Jeppesen
Denmark
Nature- and microphoto:
http://www.naturfotografi.dk
"Thomas Hintze" skrev i en meddelelse
...
Dear naturalists,
I think it is time to get rid of my Nikon Macro lense (60/f2.8),
since I more often need a " longer lense " to have a more smooth
background and to be able to photograph insects and such.
At present I am mostly using my Micro Nikkor 60/f2.8 combined with
a 2x converter, to gain the needed effects as good as possible.
However, I am still not quiete clear which new lense would be the
most convenient one for my purposes. The alternatives I do see right
now a
- Mikro Nikkor 200/f4.0
- Mikro Nikkor 105/f2.8
(can be combined with a 2x converter as well)
- 80-200/2.8 with an attached macro lense (such a 5T or 6T), in
addition to my current 60's lense)
(- Micro Nikkor AF 70-180/f4.5-5.6 - however it is seldomly available
for a good price)
Since I do not want to have much more equipment in my backpack,
it is already pretty full, I need an " optimal " compromise.
Any helpful advice is very welcome.
Greets from Germany
Thomas