Which macro is the best of the two

P

PaulP01

Suspended / Banned
Messages
32
Edit My Images
No
Tamron 90mm f2.8 SP Di Macro Lens
or
Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro

I had initially made my mind up to get the Sigma, but it is proving to be a pain in finding places that have it in stock who aren't charging over the odds. So I have looked for other recommended macro lenses in the same price range and found the Tamron which would be better because it will AF on my D40, but that isn't important in macro (or so I have read).
So what are the opinions of this forum?
 
I beleive bothare really good lenses iirc.
Hwever you need to find the answer your self. I think one of them the front elements rotates or extends. If you are trying insects then this maybe a problem.
The working distance of the 90mm is thaty going to cause any problems.
As you have also said you have a bog + Point for the auto focus on the Tamron.
Write a list down with pros and cons and see whether the sigma is worth the wait or not.
 
I'd get the Tamron 90mm anyhow, even if the Sigma 105mm was cheaper and instock.

If you can find one the Sigma 70mm is excellent.
 
Just to balance Andy, I'd get the Sigma over the Tamron. Love mine. No idea how they'd be on the D40 but suspect that you'd like either. If bugs are important, the extra reach makes the difference.

Chris
 
I think you'd be happy with either, both are cracking lenses.

I was in the same quandary but my local camera shop had the Tamron in stock and not the Sigma, so the Tamron won out.

If you go for the Tamron make sure it's the latest version, it should have printed on the body 272E.
 
Tulipone said:
Just to balance Andy, I'd get the Sigma over the Tamron. Love mine. No idea how they'd be on the D40 but suspect that you'd like either. If bugs are important, the extra reach makes the difference.

Chris
Click to expand...

Will it make a big difference? Cos I am interested in bugs.
 
The Siggy is a fantastic lens and it'll give you a bit more working distance than the Tamron (not a lot but a bit) and that can make a difference with bugs:thumbs::thumbs:
 
PaulP01 said:
Will it make a big difference? Cos I am interested in bugs.
Click to expand...

Not to disagree with my good bud Chris, but the difference between 90mm and 105mm for bugs is no useful difference at all working distance wise. Less than an inch. And thats measured from the sensor plane, not the end of the lens...
 
puddleduck said:
Not to disagree with my good bud Chris, but the difference between 90mm and 105mm for bugs is no useful difference at all working distance wise. Less than an inch. And thats measured from the sensor plane, not the end of the lens...
Click to expand...

An inch is an inch!

If you are planning to get that close, you are going to need a good tripod, not a cheapie.

To alter my post slightly, I guess I'd try both (I did in Campkins) and see which I preferred.

Chris
 
Tulipone said:
An inch is an inch!

If you are planning to get that close, you are going to need a good tripod, not a cheapie.

To alter my post slightly, I guess I'd try both (I did in Campkins) and see which I preferred.

Chris
Click to expand...

Forget a tripod for live insects. Hand held, manual focus and move the camera in and out til the beastie is in focus. A decent ring flash is order of the day too:thumbs::thumbs:
 
Both cracking lenses, you'll not be disappointed by either. (I know that's no bloody help whatsoever :D )
 
I have a sigma 105mm and I'm very pleased with it, its great in manual mode for macros, but the AF is quite noisy should you want to use it for portraits etc. Not sure how the Tamron compares....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top