Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Nikon 40mm f2.8 micro

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

55% OFF new PortraitPro 12 - use code EPHZROS414.
SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Jul 2012 - 10:40 PM

I've been testing The Nikon 40mm micro today and WOW!!! - all I can say is Tamron is going to have to be one hell of a good piece of kit to surpass it. The Nikon is screamingly sharp, achingly beautiful colour rendition, super silent & pretty quick AF - I could go on, just brilliant !!!! Its lit a creative spark in my heart already, after just a few hours.

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
2 Jul 2012 - 10:40 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Overread
Overread  53745 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
2 Jul 2012 - 11:39 PM

I've yet to see a soft macro lens - they are all amazingly sharp. The Tamron might lose the AF battle, but for macro that is moot anyway as its typically not used.

Also did you try the 40mm at 1:1? Ie as close as you could focus it?

SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
2 Jul 2012 - 11:54 PM

I have tried AF at 1:1 on Nikon - and it worked fine every time. I've still to try Tamron SP90 - should get it in next day or two - From what people have said I thought it would be an easy decision, I'll leave judgement until then - whichever I keep, The Nikon sure is an excellent lens.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
3 Jul 2012 - 12:00 AM

Don't forget they are very different focal lengths. With the Nikon you will need to get much closer to the subject. This may not matter if you are taking inanimate objects but for insects etc it may make a lot of difference.

SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
3 Jul 2012 - 12:16 AM

As long as Tamron is as good & sharp (which I'm sure it is!) - then I totally agree 90mm is much more useful than a slightly better AF. I'm looking forward to trying Tamron even more now, as this will be my first owned, true macro lens. The Nikon has given me something to think about though - thats for sure. A very good lens.Would make truly excellent general use.

SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
3 Jul 2012 - 10:30 PM

Would I be right in saying a problem with a 40mm macro lens is actually physically getting close enough to your subject when using a tripod? - which your going to be using most of the time. So its going to be quite awkward unless a nice flat subject, eg. getting into bush crevices etc.

Last Modified By SEMANON at 3 Jul 2012 - 10:34 PM
SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
5 Jul 2012 - 11:32 PM

After trying both of these excellent lenses, I still can't decide, I can see peoples point about distance from subject & how Tamron is better, I'm not sure about using it as a walkabout/portrait lens though, it seems slightly long.The 40mm micro does seem a very good general use as well as having 1:1 option.I suppose its what I'm going to use for the most.Cheers for advice here and elsewhere peopleWink

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
5 Jul 2012 - 11:45 PM

Well, as you are using a camera which has a 1.5 crop, it may be a 40mm lens will be OK. In terms of angle of view it is equivalent to using a 60mm lens on a full-frame camera.

90mm on your camera is like using 135mm on FF... maybe just a little long for macro. and indeed a walkabout/portrait lens. What about the Nikon 60mm Micro?

SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
5 Jul 2012 - 11:59 PM

I just mean That The Tamron is more a macro specific lens, just a little long for a walkabout, while The Nikon is a good all rounder as well as a macro starter - I really can't make my mind up on this one - but I suppose no one else is going to.Smile I'm sure it'll come to me.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139367 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
6 Jul 2012 - 12:00 AM

But what about the 60mm Nikon Micro? Have you not considered that one as well? Smile

Overread
Overread  53745 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
6 Jul 2012 - 6:59 AM

There is also the Sigma 70mm f2.8 macro to consider as well. Both it and the nikon 60mm are fullframe compatible lenses (I'm certain that the Sigma is, I'm fairly sure the Nikon is as well, but I don't shoot Nikon so I could be mistaken) as well.

Either the 60mm or 70mm would be a good compromise between the 40mm which is too short for macro work and the 90mm which is too long for generalist work.

SEMANON
SEMANON  195 forum posts United Kingdom
6 Jul 2012 - 7:40 AM

Is the general consensus that The 90mm is too long for more general use then? It kinda seemed that way to me, but I'm only pretty new to photography.

discreetphoton
discreetphoton Site Moderator 93427 forum postsdiscreetphoton vcard United Kingdom20 Constructive Critique Points
6 Jul 2012 - 8:23 AM

I wouldn't say so. I use longer lenses more than anything else, and still find my 105mm to be a great walkaround lens. It's very dependent on your shooting style. I had a 50mm f/1.8 that got sold not so long ago because I almost never used it, even a lot of people will tell you it's the most important and useful lens you can have.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.