Is a 60mil macro lens enough?

Hi,

I'm off to Lembeh in January. I have a Nikon 60mil macro lens, but I'm starting to wonder if this is going to fall short for some of the smaller stuff. Do you think the 105 would be worth the investment? Or is it just gear lust and the 60 is fine?

Cheers Andy.

Take a 60 & 105VR. Some critters can be really small & some are very shy. For example, shrimp goby with shrimp - I usually camp out about 1m away & just wait. And if you can get really close to small subjects the 105 gives you more working distance for lighting. The 60 is my main lens there but always do several dives with 105, especially when we're specifically looking for something small like a pygmy.

Hi,

I'm off to Lembeh in January. I have a Nikon 60mil macro lens, but I'm starting to wonder if this is going to fall short for some of the smaller stuff. Do you think the 105 would be worth the investment? Or is it just gear lust and the 60 is fine?

 

Cheers Andy.

Go to Lembeh every year. Now that I have the new 105VR, I have stopped using the 60mm, which had been a favourite for years. However it's both heavy and expensive, esp. with Subal port. They also make float collar to go around port, and it's really needed to get proper balance underwater.

The 105 has shallower depth of field, and can make even small nudis difficult to capture in full focus. Superb lens, but still think 60mm more versatile, unless your specific subject target is 1 cm and under. In any case, avoid the old 105, which hunts quite a bit, and slowly.

At a given magnification ratio, the DOF is approximately the same for both 60 & 105. & yes, the old 105 is slow compared to the VR, which can sometimes be too fast - something to get used to.

I went to Lembeh with only a 60mm because I didn't have a 100mm (Canon) and found this to be more than enough.

For Lembeh Straits a 60 mm is the ideal lens since the water quality is not the greatest and the 60 mm allows you to get close.

Another lens I like is the 70-180 mm nikkor macro with/without a diopter

haven't been to Lembeh yet (going in March), but my experience even in relatively low vis is that the working distance of the Canon 60 (maybe Nikon is better) on a crop frame camera is too close -scares the critters and doesn't provide enough room for lighting - tried the 60 and use the 100 now. on a full frame Nikon i'd use the 200 or 105 with an extender. the 70-180 is probably discontinued for a good reason.

I'd also think about investing in a Woody/Subsea wet lens or something equivalent for extra magnification of those lovely, tiny critters.

I'd also think about investing in a Woody/Subsea wet lens or something equivalent for extra magnification of those lovely, tiny critters.

So you think the 105 may still not be enough on its own? Not much hope for the 60 then!

I was there again in may and had the canon 60mm and the 100mm. i just used a combination of 1.4tc, extension tubes and dioptres to the lenses depending on what I was hoping to photograph. Just be careful that your maximum focul length isnt inside of your port though.

Stew

Just be careful that your maximum focul length isnt inside of your port though.

Stew

Not sure what you mean here Stew?

Andy.

The 60mm has a very short focal length, so depending on what sort of ports your using, combination of tc, extenders, etc., it is possible that your focal length is actually too short for your port and the focus is inside of the port.

I have had some cases where you need to be literally right on the glass to get 1:1. Not too much fun in my opinion, but it does have its uses.

Me, I stick with the 100mm, although the 60mm makes a nice fish lens as well.

Cheers,

Chris

Just be careful that your maximum focul length isnt inside of your port though.

 

Stew

 

Not sure what you mean here Stew?

 

Andy.

The point I was trying to make is that the quality of the water and vis in Lembeh Straits is poor with silt and garbage, so a 60 mm allows you to get closer to the subject than a 100 mm. The decreased subject to camera distance with the 60 mm will give you better pics vs a 100 mm.

The point I was trying to make is that the quality of the water and vis in Lembeh Straits is poor with silt and garbage, so a 60 mm allows you to get closer to the subject than a 100 mm. The decreased subject to camera distance with the 60 mm will give you better pics vs a 100 mm.

I went there two years ago. I was very glad I took both the 60 and 105VR. The pygmy seahorses pretty much require the 105. The dive guides there are pretty good at even telling you before a dive which lens to bring along. If you are going all the way to Lembeh what's another small fortune in lenses. Better to have it with you than wish you had it when you don't have it. Don't think there are a lot of photo shops handy out there.

Enjoy.

Andy

Hi

I spent a year working in the Lembeh Straits and found I used both - and the wet lens too.

The 60mm is best for things like ghost pipefish and nudibrancs. The 105mm is ideal for pygmy seahorses and pygmy pipe dragons. It allows you to, as others have said, stay 2'-3' away and get your strobes in a good position. I did find though that the high-speed hunting of the VR 105 can be a bit much at times - and even lead to a feeling of seasickness! MF is necessary sometimes. Interestingly the slower hunting of the old 105 didn't cause the seasickness issue. I wonder if Nikon know?

Seahorses and pipe dragons can be very hard to find in the viewfinder with a 105. You might want to talk to the guide about him pointing to the seahorse with his stick so that you can can find the stick in your viewfinder and work down to the seahorse. Alternatively moving a little distance away from the fan, "find" the seahorse in your viewfinder and then gradually move in closer re-focussing all the time.

Patience and excellent buoyancy skills are the name of the game. And luck. Seahorses will turn away very quickly and that classic shot of them looking at you is very hard to catch.

The diving is sensational. You'll love it 60mm or 105mm - have fun!

Hi,

I'm off to Lembeh in January. I have a Nikon 60mil macro lens, but I'm starting to wonder if this is going to fall short for some of the smaller stuff. Do you think the 105 would be worth the investment? Or is it just gear lust and the 60 is fine?

 

Cheers Andy.

Both give you 1:1 and both will work with a tele (1.4) to get you more magnification. If you plan on using an external (SubSee or MacroMate) then you want the 100 since the magnification effect on the 60 will be quite small. If you could swing the $, I would definitely bring both.

Bill

Hi all,

Rather than replying to all points. I'd like to thank everybody here for their comments, help and advice. I've read them all with interest and taken it all onboard.

I'd especially like to thank the very kind "wetpixeler" for the offer to loan the 105.

This really is a good "space".

Thanks again,

Andy.

Hi, just back from Lembeh had 5 days at KBR Fantastic! and 6 days at Tasik Ria VGood, used a 105 nikon vr lense its the same 1:1 as a 60mm but your just further away with the 105 and dont disturb critters, get 2 strobes, hire big cylinders stay shallow for time in the shallows, as we saw lots in 5-10 metres. See Facebook photos. Some pygmy seahorses are minute, so put on close up diopter lense, as I had to crop a lot.

Thanks Terry Goldie

ps have great time

Thinking of booking KBR for 10 days next time so we can dive 40 times in 10 days and taking my rebreather what ever the cost.