poster said:
Yeah I bought my Nikon 80-200 AF-D for $800. The AFS version goes for about 1k most of the time though.
Used Nikon 105mm 2.5f ais goes for about $100 maybe $150 if stellar condition.
The newest VR version of the 105 goes for about $700.
Really? The AF-D two ring goes for 600-700 around here. The AF-S version is the one that goes for 800$, however I think a lot of 'em are missing the original hood.
Also I'll look into the 105 AI-S because that is about the same as buying a 50+Raynox.
Thanks!
aslightdelay said:
The Tokina 100mm macro goes for about half the Nikkor 105, and is supposed to be a damn good lens. Nikkor, Tamron, and I think Sigma also do a 60mm macros (the Nikkor 60mm with the ED glass goes for about 5-something on Amazon, the non-ED for somewhat less). The 100 should, from what I gather, get you to 1:1. The 60, not sure. On the other hand, if you don't plan on doing that much macro, maybe the 60 would be a better option? Some people swear by the 105 as a portrait lens (I've seen some of Mike Gunter's stuff on here taken with a 105, and I've got to say, it works), but if you find the 60 a more useful aside from just macro, go for it.
I am a big Tokina fan as such both my lenses are Tokina, but right now I want to go with Nikkor glass. Not a fan of Sigma at all and refuse to throw my money towards them and I know the Tamron 90mm is highly rated but too plastic for my liking and again not sure if I'll go macro crazy. I just want to test the waters.
gelu88 said:
awesome looking product, and its right in my price range.
i bought a cheap magnifier off ebay a while back, just to see, and i like the concept.
once i get this i'll post some pictures, seems pretty legit.
Yes, do this, then report back! You do the testing for me!
