60 mm or 105 mm macro

I am going to indonesia next month which lens is better for macro nikon 60mm or the 105 mm and why is one better then the other. I already have the nikon 60 mm but if the 105 is that much better I will buy that one also.

thanks Larry

The main advantage with the 105 is working distance, so for shy subjects it is the way to go. Themain fault with the 105 is it is slow to autofocus. Many only use the 105 in manual focus.

I have never used either lens in manual focus - and I have used them on 6 different Nikon bodies UW.

If you can get close the 60mm is better than the 105mm. In Lembeh for example I much prefer the 60mm. But in most places the 105mm is better.

Alex

I think it also depends upon the size of subject you are going after. For static subjects it doesn't matter, they both do 1:1. But given a fixed "personal space" of your subject, the 105mm is great for small stuff. If you want shots of christmas tree worms, blennys, garden eels and fish eyes etc. the 105mm is the way to go. If you want whole medium sized fish the 60mm is better.

I liked shooting the 105mm on my last trip. It was a totally different experience than the 60mm. In some cases it felt like I was constrained to shooting through a straw because the FOV was so much smaller. But once you adjust your frame of refrence and think about getting interesting smaller shots I got some photos I was very happy with. Getting a whole grouper is impossible with this lens, but once you shoot just the eye it opens up a whole new world.

Is a dioptre necessary with the 105mm? I have a 60 at the moment which I use in a Sea and Sea standard flat port (formerly with a D70, shortly with a D200).

A diopter is not neccesary with any flat port, but you can go for more magnification with a 3T (1.5x) or 4T (3x) close up lens

Karl

In my limited (land only) experience, diopters (like the Nikon T series) are far less useful for macro lenses than they are for standard lenses -- the macros already focus so danged close, anyway. If you want more magnification, a teleconverter may be a better bet, in my opinion (Kenko 2X works great with either the Nikon 60 or 105 non-VR).

All the best,

Chris

I have and like them both. The new AF-S 105 has a very fast AF system. Better than the 60 and a lot better than the old 105. As mentioned in other posts they do slightly different things.

I just got back from a trip with a new Canon 100mm and love it. I've had a 60mm EFS for some time, and had reservations about whether the 100mm would be of value.

No regrets at all, the 100mm is a lens and I love the focal length. The Nikon lense might be different, but I'd expect the focal lengths in practive to be very similar.

damien