Question:
Is the 70-180 Micro AF lens as good as the 60mm or 105mm Nikkor Micros? Henry
Response:
70-180 goes to 1:2, if you want more , you can use the close-up lenses
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is the 70-180 Micro AF lens as good as the 60mm or 105mm Nikkor Micros? Depends on what you want. The 60 and 105 lenses will both go to 1:1 reproduction. That is, the image size on the negative will be the same size as the image you’re photographing. The 70-180 goes to something like 1:1.3. Which means that 1 inch of your subject will be represented as 3/4 inch on the negative. I’m not sure, but I doubt if the 70-180 is designed for a flat field, whereas the 60 and 105 lenses are.
Response:
This lens has got good reviews, but be aware that when focussed close and set to 180mm, the lens is no longer a 180mm…probably something closer to 120mm. This means that your working distance will be somewhat less than the 200mm AF Micro Nikkor. Rick Rieger
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Is the 70-180 Micro AF lens as good as the 60mm or 105mm Nikkor Micros? Depends on what you want. The 60 and 105 lenses will both go to 1:1 reproduction. That is, the image size on the negative will be the same size as the image you’re photographing. The 70-180 goes to something like 1:1.3. Which means that 1 inch of your subject will be represented as 3/4 inch on the negative. I’m not sure, but I doubt if the 70-180 is designed for a flat field, whereas the 60 and 105 lenses are.
Response:
I have this lens for almost 3 years and have been looking for a reason to trade it for the 200macro. I can’t. The image quality is superb. I traded the 200 and 105 AIS macro lenses and haven’t been sorry. I’ve not had a problem with the shorter working distance either. The zoom far outways any of the shotcomings of this lens. BTW, the maximum magnification is 1.3:1. Just short of 1:1. Harvey
Response:
Is the 70-180 Micro AF lens as good as the 60mm or 105mm Nikkor Micros? Henry
I suggest you read Bjorn’s review of the matter. Steve
Response:
Nikkor 70-180 Micro- any advice? Yeah … buy the AF 200mm f/4 Micro instead. Peter Burian
Response:
I agree. I had the 70-180 for two days and returned it because it had two quite large bubbles in one of the lens elements. I mean easy to see to the point that the sales guy didn’t even think about arguing the point. I’m trying to sell my 60 to get the 105, a lens I’ve had for awhile. So what does that tell you? If I could afford it, I’d get both the 105 and the 200.
Response:
You might want to think about finding an old 90-180 Vivitar Series 1 that was designed for macro work. Somewhat rare, but much cheaper than the Nikon zoom or even a 105 fixed focal length lens. I think there is one on EBAY right now. Brian I agree. I had the 70-180 for two days and returned it because it had two quite large bubbles in one of the lens elements. I mean easy to see to the point that the sales guy didn’t even think about arguing the point. I’m trying to sell my 60 to get the 105, a lens I’ve had for awhile. So what does that tell you? If I could afford it, I’d get both the 105 and the 200.
Before you buy.
Response:
You might want to think about finding an old 90-180 Vivitar Series 1 that was designed for macro work. Somewhat rare, but much cheaper than the Nikon zoom or even a 105 fixed focal length lens. I think there is one on EBAY right now. Brian
Brian, Did you work on this lens? I have one. It’s remarkable, but I don’t know of any modern equivalent, even though it’s a very useful type. My understanding is that the 70-180 shortens its focal length dramatically at the higher magnifications so that at 1/2 the front lens is only about 120mm or so from the object – scarcely better than a 50mm macro and certainly not what one buys a 180mm macro for. The Series 1, on the other hand, gives 1/2 size at about 400mm working distance. Who owns the rights to the S1 design? It seems like the type should be revived: it’s great to have a macro zoom for which the zoom ring changes magnification without changing focus. Paul
Response:
Paul: The lens was designed by a friend and colleage of mine well before I became a lens designer. The optical prescription is in the patent literature and I have it, although I have misplaced the number. Let me know if you are really curious. The design is now in the public domain, so anyone can build it if they choose to. The 90-180 uses a well-implemented version of the common front group focusing technique, so it does maintain its focal length reasonably well. The Nikkor macro zoom is the closest thing to it that I know of, but I think you are right about the differences in focusing behaviour. The Nikkor also costs about three times the price of a used 90-180 in good condition. I’m awfully glad the 90-180 exists, but I heard it was not very successful when it was introduced back in the 1970’s, so I doubt that it will be revived. My recommendation is: if you don’t already have one and you find a decent one, buy it! The same is true for the Vivitar 90mm f/2.5 macro lens which was later marketed by Tokina. Brian – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You might want to think about finding an old 90-180 Vivitar Series 1 that was designed for macro work. Somewhat rare, but much cheaper than the Nikon zoom or even a 105 fixed focal length lens. I think there is one on EBAY right now. Brian Brian, Did you work on this lens? I have one. It’s remarkable, but I don’t know of any modern equivalent, even though it’s a very useful type. My understanding is that the 70-180 shortens its focal length dramatically at the higher magnifications so that at 1/2 the front lens is only about 120mm or so from the object – scarcely better than a 50mm macro and certainly not what one buys a 180mm macro for. The Series 1, on the other hand, gives 1/2 size at about 400mm working distance. Who owns the rights to the S1 design? It seems like the type should be revived: it’s great to have a macro zoom for which the zoom ring changes magnification without changing focus. Paul
Before you buy.
Response:
My understanding is that the 70-180 shortens its focal length dramatically at the higher magnifications
Yes, and this is common with most Macro lenses. In extreme close focusing the focal length is short. e.g. A Tamron 90mm Macro lens at its minimum focus is actually a 60mm focal length. The longer the Macro lens the better at least in nature photography. Peter Burian
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.