Sigma 105mm 2.8 vs tamron 90mm 2.8

[Flatsfish b]

I am trying to compare the two lenses for a nikon d90, and I'm coming up with a lot of positive feedback for both. I want to get a lens to use for macro and basic portrait photography. If you were choosing between these two what would you get and why? I am going to purchase used as this is not going to be a main lens used often.
Any other options on the 300.00 range are appreciated as well

I have been a long time reader but just finally created a user name on this forum, hello to all!

Barry

 

[Markw]

There is really no comparison. This round, Tamron wins for build and picture quality. That being said, there really is no difference for all intents and purposes between the lenses as far as optical quality. Both will produce close to the same image quality. The Tamron 90mm has long been renowned as being one of the sharpest macro lenses. Though, almost all 1:1 macro lenses give extremely sharp photos..so this is almost an invalid statement.

That being said, I would still go with the Sigma. I own one. It is a magnificent lens that produces wonderful photos. I never complain about the image quality. If I complain about anything, it is the focal length. I dont think it's long enough (and this is on a DX body..so its really something like 152mm). That's why I would not go with the Tamron. I think 150+mm is really useful for macro work. Anything under 100mm would be almost useless for critters for me. 105mm is almost too close for most of them.

Sigma 150mm F/2.8 HSM if you can save for it. If not, Sigma 105mm is a wonderful lens. If I can find a used 150, I may sell mine.

Mark

PS. Welcome to the forum. We're good people.

 

[jake337]

I just picked up a Tokina at-x m100 pro d 100mm f2.8 and am loving it. Found it used at adorama for $350. Bare in mind many places are charging 20-50 dollors more than MRSP on this lense. It is also out of stock at many places. I've read it has better build quaility than the competitiors although I haven't held any of them to confirm.