I'm not sure what you mean by standard lens with a macro, so this advice may not be useful. The Nikon 105mm prime is a fantastic lens. On the 7100 it would act as about a 130mm. I've used it on both my D90 and my D610 and it's clear and sharp. However, I'm not sure it would be considered a standard lens. It would be a prime lens, if that's what you mean. They are less expensive options so see what other Nikon users would recommend. Also, you probably want to think about what focal length you want (e.g., 50mm macro versus 105mm macro).
You can take advantage of the fact that a wider number of lenses will focus with a D7100 than with the D3XXX and D5XXX series. I've read glowing recommendations for the Tokina 100mm f2.8 but not used it myself.
@frantic@taffy@jasperc Taffy mentions the 105 f/2.8 Nikkor. As good as (I'd say better, but others swear the Nikkor can't be beat) is the Sigma 105 f/2.8, about the same price (US$900+). The Tokina Jasper mentions is half the price, and does auto focus with the D7100. Half the price of the other two, the "long" macro lens in my bag and almost as sharp as the others, especially on the APS-C camera since the edges are cropped away with these full-frame lenses. A little more chromatic aberration (fringing) on strong edges than the other two, but trivial to remove in post if it shows up. For my (occasional) dedicated macro use, perfectly adequate.
All these are "long" lenses especially on the D7100, "full frame equivalent" angle of a 150mm lens. But I like "stepping back" a little, as I do with portraits too, so I am not right on top of the subject if I don't have to be.
Truth to tell, since I have bought the Nikkor 28-300VR (the new one), I haven't mounted the Tokina since I don't know when, the 28-300 having a very short (18 inches from the focal plane) minimum focus distance across the whole zoom range, thanks to the optical magic from the Nikon optical engineers, and just fine for "close up" even at a full 300mm. This is a magic lens, and while I hesitate to cite the approval of Ken Rockwell, I do agree with him on this one. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-300mm.htm
@frankhymus glad you're enjoying the 28-300. As far as macro goes the Rockwell article does suggest it would do the job pretty well.
Have you chosen this over the Nikon 18-200 or 18-300 offerings in anticipation of going FX in the future or do you reckon it's the best of the superzooms for DX as well?
@jasperc Thanks. It's not really a "super zoom" in the sense that 28mm is not really "wide" on the D7100 as it would be on an FX body. 42mm FFE indeed. But it is extremely useful as a quality "walk around" lens, a quality lens in the way that the 18-300, even the 18-200, is not. I still use quite frequently the f/3.5 Sigma 10-20. It is not excessively heavy or bulky, somewhat similar to the Nikon 18-300, which is a surprisingly "solid" DX lens when compared with something like the Tamron 16-300. But yes, I did have the FF in mind, although the lens acts very differently on a D750. Exactly like an 18-200 on a DX body indeed.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
All these are "long" lenses especially on the D7100, "full frame equivalent" angle of a 150mm lens. But I like "stepping back" a little, as I do with portraits too, so I am not right on top of the subject if I don't have to be.
Truth to tell, since I have bought the Nikkor 28-300VR (the new one), I haven't mounted the Tokina since I don't know when, the 28-300 having a very short (18 inches from the focal plane) minimum focus distance across the whole zoom range, thanks to the optical magic from the Nikon optical engineers, and just fine for "close up" even at a full 300mm. This is a magic lens, and while I hesitate to cite the approval of Ken Rockwell, I do agree with him on this one.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-300mm.htm
Have you chosen this over the Nikon 18-200 or 18-300 offerings in anticipation of going FX in the future or do you reckon it's the best of the superzooms for DX as well?