4 replies to this topic

[rschwede]

Hello!

 

First time posting here and was seeing if I can get some feedback.

I will be travelling SE Asia for 6 months with a Mavic Pro and Nikon gear. I will be backpacking so will need to be light! So far, I am bringing my D750 with a 20mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 and I am searching for my 3rd and final lens. Specifically I am looking at another prime and I am torn between the 85mm 1.8 and the 105 macro 2.8.

 

Any thoughts on focal range? weight issues? etc. What would YOU choose!? I love the idea of bringing a macro but the size is the only con I am seeing on the 105mm macro. I don't think the 50mm to the 85mm may be enough length...

Thanks Nikon users

 

Ryan

[emccarthy25]

I don’t know if you’ve already left for your trip, but I might suggest something in the 150mm range and an extension tube set for when you want to do some macro shots. Extension tubes don’t take up much space and even for ones with electrical connections are relatively affordable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Merco_61]

Why the MicroNikkor? The new Tamron 90 is better both for macro use and for normal short tele use.

 

Extension tubes don't work too well with IF lenses as they get very visible CA when used with extension. A good diopter like a Raynox is a better choice if you decide to get a modern lens without close-up capabilities.

 

I would rather have a macro lens as my short tele as the traditional portrait lenses don't do too well up close. It is too bad that Nikon haven't released an affordable 105 or 135 as those focal lengths work better as a third in a 20>50>? ladder.

 

My travel kit are 24/1.8>35/1.8>105/2DC, but that is because of using the old manual focus lenses for so long. (24/2.8Ai>35/2 O-Nikkor>105/2.5 were a joy to work with.)

[TBonz]

Don't get me wrong, I do understand the weight issues - especially when backpacking!  However, if it were me I would go with the 24-70 and the 70-200 or maybe the 24, 50, 85 and 135.  Once in a lifetime so I would not want a 105 as my longest lens.  That said, it isn't my body and I am not sure what else you need to carry so I will also say that having had the 85 1.4 and the 105 Micro 2.8 as well as a similar combo in Pentax many years ago, I seem to prefer the 105 range to the 85 range.  My 105 gets used more (not counting macro) than my 85 ever did.  I have not had the chance to try the Tamron 90 and if Peter mentioned it, you should probably look into it !

[fallout666]

Don't get me wrong, I do understand the weight issues - especially when backpacking!  However, if it were me I would go with the 24-70 and the 70-200 or maybe the 24, 50, 85 and 135.  Once in a lifetime so I would not want a 105 as my longest lens.  That said, it isn't my body and I am not sure what else you need to carry so I will also say that having had the 85 1.4 and the 105 Micro 2.8 as well as a similar combo in Pentax many years ago, I seem to prefer the 105 range to the 85 range.  My 105 gets used more (not counting macro) than my 85 ever did.  I have not had the chance to try the Tamron 90 and if Peter mentioned it, you should probably look into it !

i am with him on 24-70 with 70-200mm and maybe 85 or 105 macro lens. since macro will give better closeup shots of bugs or  other plants or small lizards or tiny creatures too.