Which set-up would provide me with the best quality photos?

answer is always the same

in no particular order:
tamron 90 2.8
sigma 105 2.8
sigma 150 2.8
nikkor 60 2.8
nikkor 105 2.8

note: if canon replaces nikon in the thread title, then answer should read

in no particular order:

tamron 90 2.8
sigma 105 2.8
sigma 150 2.8
canon 100 2.8



mods pls sticky

I'd recommend the Nikkor 105mm 2.8. It's crazy sharp and doesn't require you to get really close to your subject to get 1:1. It's sturdy too, mostly metal. Plus it has VR. Pricey, but worth it if you would use it a lot.

what if i am really cheap...dont wanna spend a lot of money...(hince the D50)...BEST BANG FOR THE BUCK macro lense?

take your pic, they're all under $1,000

and the wife is gonna wonder why the '68 bug is gone and there is another lense in the camera case...soon after I will be the next one gone

WOW $1000 guess I gotta start saving my pennies....

they're actually all under $900

best bang for buck is sigma or tamron

you can get a used tamron 90 for under $400 and it WILL autofocus on your D50 (pretty much anything will)

You can also get extension tubes for lenses you already have, you can shoot through a magnifying glass or there are also screw on magnifying lenses that mount onto an existing lens (I can't remember what they're called but they come in sets of three for around $20 and up). All of these will work until you can save up for a good macro lens.

I also rock the reversing ring occasionally

what are you planning on taking mostly? if you are taking pictures of the tank then heres my 2 cents

from my experience, if you have a small nano tank, 20-30gals with corals sometimes close up to the glass. the nikon 60mm AF-S would be a good choice. you can just lay the lens right on the glass ensuring your camera is always perpendicular to the subject so your pictures always comes out clear with no distortion. corals are probably not going to be too far back into the tank since theres not much space so the focal length would be enough. its not that expensive (around 500) for a nikon lens.

but if you dont plan on doing strickly aquarium pictures, but like to go out and take 1:1 pics, then this might not be the lens for you. since you have to be inches away inorder to get 1:1. you are blocking most of the light. and if you have the lens hood, your subject would be inside the hood which is stupid.

the nikon 105mm VR is a beast of a lens. its ultra sharp, the VR is a plus and you dont have to be inches away from your subject for get 1:1. this lens would be great for larger tanks when the corals is pretty far into the tank. the 105mm would give you enough reach. thing about this lens tho, its expensive, focus is pretty slow eps if you are using the continuous focus function to take pics of the fish.

but like i said, if you arent using this primarily for the aquarium, but taking pics outdoors, insects flowers etc, this would be a great lens, it has VR, dont have to be inches from your subject. its a little bit on the heavy side, but what do you expect from a full metal body construction and VR.

if you are not a nikon fanboi and dont need everything nikon, sigma 150mm is an excellent choice. the optics are on par with nikon or canon, and i think its even better. it has lens body tripod mount for better balance. its not as expensive as others too.

If you don't mind manual focus, the old 55mm Micro-Nikkor is very sharp and can be had for around $130. Adorama might have them. It's what I use.

Also, the magnifying close-up lenses that screw onto your filter thread work pretty well. AF and everything still works through them. They are really cheap, like $20 for 4.

I use both of those things on my D40, and I like them both. The 55mm Micro is also a great all-around lens.

I had been thinking about an older lens as well. I heard somewhere that some of the older lenses are superior to some of the newer macros. Is that true?