Have anyone tried either of these macro lens?

itsme123 · Jan 29, 2007

Have anyone tried either or both of the below macro lens. I am split between the two. Both are very similar in spec and price. The biggest difference (that I can see) is that the Sigma has a minimum aperture at F45 while the Tamron's min aperture is at F32. Any info or recomendation is appreciated :thumbup: .

Sigma: MACRO 105mm F2.8 EX DG 1:1 http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3253&navigator=5
Tamron: SP AF90mm F/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/90mm.asp

Thanks!

nakedyak · Jan 29, 2007

I have the Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX lens, and I like it a lot. Its very sharp, even at f2.8, and pretty cheap too. I have a lot of photos taken with this lens in this gallery here if you want to take a look.

macro shots taken with the Sigma

woodsac · Jan 29, 2007

I also have the Sigma 105mm. It's a great lens.

*cheap plug*
Mine is for sale right now :biggrin:

Don Simon · Jan 30, 2007

I've used the Tamron 90mm in one of it's previous incarnations, it was great.

nakedyak · Jan 30, 2007

i have also read very good reviews of the Tamron

fmw · Jan 30, 2007

I haven't owned or used either of them. But I can tell you that the Tamron macro lenses have been famous for outstanding optical quality for as long as I can remember. Many pros who would normally only buy a camera brand lens have bought the Tamrons over the years because of this deserved reputation.

The issue between f32 and f45 is fairly insignificant. Up close you can make up the dof difference by moving the camera back a few inches and cropping the image. f45 would also be slightly more prone to softness due to diffraction.

surge · Jan 30, 2007

Also depending on your camera the sigma may not operate at f45 - nikons and minolta fits (i think) will only go up to f32. But i agree with fmw - having read a bunch of reviews you wouldn't be using the lense at such extremes of appature anyway.

I hope Itsme123 won't mind me hijacking the thread but i have a question about these macros also...

Macro lenses auto focus slower than a comparable standard lense because they have a larger range and are normally geared to allow more accurate focus; does this cause annoyance when they are used as a standard walkaround lense?

I'm thinking of buying a 2.8 prime, length to be confirmed (but maybe the sigma 50mm or 70mm) does anyone have these lenses and would i have trouble taking pictures of action, ie:

groups
animals
sport

thanks again,

itsme123 · Jan 30, 2007

nakedyak: Nice pictures! I almost ordered the Sigma right after I viewed your gallery :mrgreen:.

Then.... I read what fmw wrote then I am swayed back to the middle. I guess I can't go wrong with either lens.

fmw: Good info on the min aperture.

fmw (or others): How does the number of lens groupings and elements effect the qulity of the picture?

woodsac: Sorry, I've got a BH Photo gift card to finish up. Thanks for the offer anyways :thumbup: .

surge: No problem. I am interested in the info also.

fmw · Jan 30, 2007

itsme123 said:
fmw (or others): How does the number of lens groupings and elements effect the qulity of the picture?

Simplicity is the key. The fewer elements the designer needs to use to correct aberrations the better. More elements mean lower contrast and more distortion. The faster the lens, the more elements it will need to get things corrected. The more things move inside the lens barrel - same story. Without the correcting elements you have poor image quality, with too many you get poor image quality again. What is the right number? Well that would depend on a textbook full of issues.

nakedyak · Jan 30, 2007

itsme123 said:
nakedyak: Nice pictures! I almost ordered the Sigma right after I viewed your gallery :mrgreen:.

Then.... I read what fmw wrote then I am swayed back to the middle. I guess I can't go wrong with either lens.

fmw: Good info on the min aperture.

fmw (or others): How does the number of lens groupings and elements effect the qulity of the picture?

woodsac: Sorry, I've got a BH Photo gift card to finish up. Thanks for the offer anyways :thumbup: .

surge: No problem. I am interested in the info also.

Thanks! My lens is just the EX lens, not the one that is optimized for digital cameras, so keep that in mind. I suppose that other version might be a little better.

as far as f32 or f45, diffraction is really a problem at those apertures. Its almost unusable, unless you ABSOLUTELY have to have that DOF.

The sigma has an extra 15mm on the Tamron, and it might be cheaper. I'm fairly sure they are both quite sharp, so i dont think you can really go wrong with either of these lenses.