I am planning to purchase my first DSLR within the next few months. After doing some extensive research on what is available, I finally narrowed it down to the Nikon D300 & the Canon EOS 40D. In comparing the two, they have similarities as well as some differences as far as features & spec’s go. I believe they are both excellent DSLR’s. I have my eye on some lenses ~ well I know exactly what they are for each model.

Here’s the clincher … I just started to get into macro photography this past summer & would like to add on a macro lens in the future.

Nikon D300 = 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro~Nikkor Close-up Lens
Canon 40D = (1st choice) 180mm EF f/3.5 L Macro USM
(2nd choice) 100mm EF f/2.8 Macro USM

If anyone has had any experience with these lenses or similar, I would appreciate any feedback or any leads to additional info. I am looking for quality & sharpness in macro images, but don’t want to base my final decision solely on the macro capabilities of the lenses / camera as I will be doing other photography as well. I am, of course, leaving my options open for Sigma & Tamron. Reading endless reviews & looking at countless images gets mind-boggling after awhile.

It’s a big decision for me & I am always thinking 6 months ahead ~ so I would appreciate your help. Thanks!

I think the Nikon D300 or Canon 40D are evenly matched when you look at the specs .
If you are into macro pics , i would go for the canon for the only reason that they have the MPE 65 ( for when things get serious ).
I would bump the Canon 180 mm for the Sigma 150 mm and maybe buy a ring flash with the difference in price .( Examples can be found in my images or =ppigeon gallery since we both use that type of lens )

Ps , don't forget to factor in a tripod ( almost a must when shooting macros )

Thank you Kristof ~ I had overlooked Canon's MPE 65mm macro lens. It looks like an excellent macro. I actually looked at your gallery when I started thinking about macro lenses & have always been impressed my your work.

I will take a look again at your gallery again as well as Pierre's.

I have more things to consider before I make my final decision ~ thanks for your help.

Link
I think the D300 is a little better, but much expansive.
As always, the difference can be found with the lenses.
And again, the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM and the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR are very good, except that the Nikkor has the VR system...
I don't know the MPE 65 though!

I have the nikon 105 2.8 (non vr version) and find it to be nice and sharp and all of that good stuff. I find it difficult to take good macro shots, but that isn't going to change from lens to lens. Tripod is very important. What i find the most difficult is selecting the right amount of depth of field and getting everything i want in focus since macro lenses are very touchy when it comes to focus.

Thank you Pierre for your input & the links ~ they were both very helpful. BTW, an interesting comparison between the two cam's.

I do like the Sigma 150mm lens & that may be the way I will go for a macro in the future, but I am also impressed with the Nikkor 105mm mainly because it has VR whereas Canon's macro lens lack IS.

Thanks again Pierre & Kristof ~ I think I may have made my final decision on my first DSLR. A big jump for me from a Canon S3 IS ~ hopefully I am up to the challenge.

Just a thought, since I too considered buying the 105 2.8 macro. With those #'s, and VR, that would make it one nice portrait lens, as well.

I definitly agree with third eye. I actually find i use my 105 macro more as portrait lens than a macro lens i think. Kind of silly i suppose, but it does a good job.

Thank you Rob & Milo for your input. I am familiar with both of your work so I will need to take a closer look at your galleries ~ Hmmmmmm both Nikon's.

K ....

Canon 40D = Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM or Sigma 150 mm = good macro w/ tripod (no IS on either lens)

Nikon D300 = 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro = nice portrait lens, but not up to par for macro work (has VR)

OR

Nikon D 300 = Sigma 150 mm = good macro /w tripod (no IS)

I know both Canon & Nikon have upcoming releases for new lens.
Canon has no new macro's listed while Nikon is releasing their AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm F/2.8 ED Lens (no VR) in March.

I would favor the Canon over Nikon for macro's, but I still can't let that weigh as a major factor in my final decision. Need to check out one overall factor first. :-)

Hold up. I think i might have been miss interpreted. I did not mean to say that my nikon lens is the problem. I am the problem. When i get things right it produces great macros. I just find macros difficult because of the nature of them. I believe hole heartedly that the trouble i run into would exist with any macro lens at that focal length if i were using it.

Being a telephoto as long as 105 allows the lens to go 1:1, but it also makes for a very narrow depth of field at lower apertures. If you stop it down to f/32 or what not, farther distances start to come into focus. But with that you lose a lot of light so you need a tripod. Also, even if it is nice and bright often a tripod is necessary because since the focus is so delicate while using a macro lens it is hard to focus and stay still enough that you don't move the camera back or forward enough to kill the focus. I'm lazy and don't like having a tripod so that creates problems for me. And when i do pull out my tripod i still have trouble nailing the right f-stop. It is the physics of a 105mm macro that causes the trouble i have. It does great things allowing you to focus on such small things, but you have to know how to control it, and im still figuring that out. That is what i was trying to say earlier.

Also, i don't speak from experience here, but i have read that while doing macros the vr is not terribly useful. I believe the article i read said it does help, but being so close to the subject the tiniest movement causes more trouble than it would if the subject were farther away and the vr has trouble compensating for it or something like that. Also i would imagine as i said before moving the camera back and forth moves it in and out of focus enough that it matters when shooting a macro, and i can't see the vr helping you too much there.

That said, I would still love to have vr on the lens for when im using the lens for other things, like portraits. Im a bit sad that i bought mine a few months before the new one was announced, but i suppose i probably saved a few dollars. Anyways, it is still a plus to have the vr, but maybe not as huge of a plus as one might think. You are probably still going to need a tripod when shooting some of your macros. You might want to do some reading and see if you can find something about that from someone who knows what they are talking about.

Hopefully that cleared up some of the confusion i think i might have caused. When i first started using mine i was surprised how much movement effected focus, and how narrow the depth of field was. So I would recommend going to a camera store and playing around with a macro lens a bit with some of those things in mind so that you can see how delicate macros are (and really how amazing people like kodo34 are at taking them. His stuff blows me away now that i have tried to take similar stuff.)

I appreciate the explanation Milo ~ I was the one that misinterpreted your previous comment ~ sorry for the confusion.

It does all make sense to me now. With my current Canon S3 IS I can change from macro mode to super macro. In macro mode /w tripod focusing is less troublesome, but when I switch to super macro it is more noticable. Of course I prefer the macro mode. I can tell you really like the 105 mm lens & I have redirected my thinking on it (positively) cause I believe it a good lens ~ it would be perfect for portraits ... macro's yes, but with alot of patience & practice, which I already know. Hmmmmmmm ~ I love a challenge.

I have also read the VR is not that useful either especially for upclose macro's. Pierre gave me an excellent link on how the VR works ~ it was very straight forward & helped alot.

I am actually going to take another look at the Nikon D300 & Canon 40D, lens, & so forth (in person) this weekend ~ then do some serious thinking.

As I said previously it is a big leap for me, but I'm looking at the "big picture" ~ where I want to be with my photography a few years from now. It didn't make sense to me to go with a D80 or XTi, then upgrade in 18 to 24 months.

Thanks to everyone for their help & input. :-)

I bought a text book on Macros recently and it had a particular technic which I want to use now. Take off the lens, turn it around and stick back on the camera. I will upload one of the shots I did this way with my 18-55mm backwards. It was quite amazing. I don't think that's a real replacement for a macro lens, but it lets you do some things that are pretty neat, with out getting new equip. It is also really hard to hold the two things together, so I am looking for the right adapting device. About the IS/VR, I've heard from some people that on a tripod the image stabilizers can cause wandering and blur. But I don't know for sure, so take that w/a grain of NaCl

Thank you John for your input ~ every bit helps. That is an interesting concept (putting the lens on backwards) for doing macro's. I will be looking for your image ~ you got me curious now.

I will be seeing in person how the IS/VR works & yes, a tripod is vital for all photography situations. I just want to choose a camera that I will be happy with & I know macro photography is touchy. As you can see I'm not rushing into a decision.

Sherree - yours is probably the most common asked question on the internet. Canon or NiKon. After looking thru your gallery I am sure your skills will bond with either camera happily. I would like to suggest some things you should consider I think would help clear your decision. Does the camera fit your hand? Who cares what the specs say, go to your local camera dealer, and actually hold both cameras in your hand. Its kinda like choosing a puppy, most people love them all, until they actually hold one in their hands, and the lick on the face usually makes the decision. If a camera licks your face, please let us all know. You are the one who has to use it, so it is very important that it fits you. You stated you did extensive research, so I am not going to rehash what you have discovered. I think the features of the camera should allow you to grow your skills, without frustration. Is the camera easy to operate. I am not going to say which camera I own, but my daughter who has limited skills and interest in photography, had absolutely no problems operating my Canon 40D in auto mode. Opps! I wasnt going to say that. The price should really help you decide, and availability of support and lenses in your area should make ownership a happy event. I believe that durability is especially important, but seldom considered till after the purchase. If you are the outdoorsy type, weather resistance is important, If you like to shoot sports then speed bursts are important, if you like to shoot portraits then accessories acceptance is important. If you just want plain better photos, learn how to use Photo Editing software first, when you develop your style, find a camera that will enhance your efforts. My final comment - I bought the Canon because I found a price that was acceptable, and I have been happy ever since.

Sherree - Gosh! I almost forgot, the one feature I especially like about my Canon is the self cleaning image sensor. I dont have to have it cleaned manually as often as I would without the system. I am not gentle with my camera, I am usually and Industrial shooter. I work in an environment where results are everything, excuses are not tolerated. Another environment where excuses are not tolerated is the Photographers who shoot the Super Bowl. What kind of equipment do they use? Good Luck :)

Thank you JB for your input ~ somehow I related to buying a camera the same way I would buy a puppy. I raise Labs & the first thing my customers tell me is what color they want ~ color being the most important, then features, & lastly personality. I do the opposite when I buy a pup ~ I look at personality first, then features, & color doesn't matter that much. In other words I wanted a camera that would fit my needs & felt comfortable in my hands. Though features / specs were equally important.

I ordered my DSLR / lenses this morning after making several trips to look at both cam's side by side. I won't tell you which one licked me in the face, though I do know I will be keeping a short leash on it wherever I go. As far as a macro lens goes, I have decided on the Sigma 150mm though I could change my mind in the next few months.

Again, thanks to everyone for your input & help. I greatly appreciate it. The adventure begins ......

Good choice. I've one (Sigma 150 mm). Wonderful lens, but it needs a calm person and to keep your breathing. For the insects, the best is to work with a tripod or a monopod at least.
The spring is coming :-)

Me ~ calm? That means I will need to ditch the MP3 player when going on photo shoots. I know it will take some time to adjust to & I also have a new tripod on order. Hopefully I will be ready by spring. Thanks again, Pierre. :-)