Nikon macro

i had the tamron 90mm and now the nikon 105 and theyre both sharp enough to slice bread. The only reason i moved to the nikon was that it could be controlled through software which i wanted for focus stacking. If it wasnt for that then i would be more than happy to be still using the tamron. I cant tell the difference between images taken with either.
 
Thanks for that. I did have my eye on the nikon but I also heard the Tamron was good too... I'm still no closer to making my decision
 
I'll add a spanner into the works and recommend the new Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG OS macro... I bought one a few weeks ago and it's incredibly sharp! One of the reviews I read compared it to a Zeiss (can't remember which). Regardless of that, I've got nothing but praise for it. :)

I was going to go for the Nikkor 105mm VR but I'm glad I didn't bother and saved myself a couple of hundred quid in the process. :)
 
Phil Young said:
I would ha e thought ANY macro by any brand of any year would be sufficient enough in the sharpness dpt. :)
Click to expand...

You'd think so Phil but the last Sigma 105mm I owned was bloody awful wide open! :)
 
Thanks... il check the new sigma 105 out... I had the old one and wasn't amazed by it... I did go from a Canon 100mm 2.8L to it though...
 
All macros are either very sharp or extremely sharp. Sharpest of them all is Sigma 180 2.8 OS.
 
I'm in the market for a macro too.......read tonnes of reviews and almost decided to get the 105 nikon, then I heard about the sigma 105 os which has been mentioned. The reviews seem to be good, worth a look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top