Nikon 105mm Macro vs Tokina 100mm Macro

[joony]

I had a sigma 105mm it is a good lens with automatic focus, But from bad material lens , photos were good, now I have a Tokina 100mm macro. With Tokina photos are even a little bit better, manual focus is very easy to handle, and quality from Tokina100mm is the best quality lens, this is lens from much stronger material, but you need to keep lens out from moisture and rain. Macro photos from Tokina are extremely sharp especially if you use a reflector on the flash. As it is good with autofocus on de 7100 photo camera, it is Also good without autofocus on de 3200, If you are little bit more careful.

 

[JTPhotography]

Tokina is a no brainer here.

 

[joony]

Because of Tokina is a cheap does not mean it is not good, every photographer who knows a little bit how to handle camera knows that with Tokina can achieve top results. From Tokina inside parts are built of of good material and metal, from outside Tokina is built of thick plastic. from inside parts from Sigma 105 macro are from weaker quality, an exterior parts from Sigma are built of thin plastic. I have respect for the technology, but please where is importance from quality of the material? I guess that nobody wants to throw money away? for Nikon and Tamron i don't know let others write, but honestly.

 

[Overread]

"no brainer" means that the choice does not need to be thought about.

Saying "Tokina is a no brainer" means that you don't have to "think" about the choice; the choice is the Tokina. It's a compliment rather than an insult to the Tokina

 

[table1349]

No brainer could also also apply to digging up an 8 month old thread, but not in this case apparently.

 

[joony]

Thank you for your kindness, and beautiful words. Do not worry about ме, I'm not mad at anyone, but i like to go into depth discussion. Any comment is welcome. I love usually the most Nikon (Nikkor) lenses, but for macro for me Tokina 100 is ideal for macro, but not for portraits.