Macro Lens

[Darkninja462]

As I don't have ~£600 to blow away on a a sony macro lense I'll haft to settle for either the Tamron 90 2.8 or the sigma 105 2.8, as there about the same price (Reasonable I think)

there are a few differences ive noticed with the specs, the Tamron has close focus range 0.29m (Sigma 0.32).

Has anyone got experience with either and whats there good/bad points, or has anyone tried the two and knows which one they prefer ?

If needed equipment :

Sony Alpha 350,

Which would be better and why ?

Regards

Ninja

[MSidPhoto]

Hey DarkNinja462.

I see you're looking to shoot some macros. Well apart from the lenses you've mentioned what you could do for shooting macros is to put a 58mm Macro Diopter (Filter) on your kit lens which I presume is an 18-70mm. I use this method and get pretty good results. For extreme macros you might also need a good lighting system. I use a simple Ring Light.

Now the lenses you mentioned. I don't know about the Tamron 90mm 2.8 but I can safely say that the Sigma 105mm 2.8 is a pretty good lens for macros. You'll get the Tamron for about $460 and the Sigma for about $480. So I say get the Sigma if you still want a Macro Lens.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
MSidPhoto

[Darkninja462]

Thank you MSidPhoto
Yes over here in the UK there is bout £30 difference between to the two, so might as well stick neck out for the extra 15mm , I will look into getting some diopter filters as well

Thank you for the great advice

Ninja

[MSidPhoto]

No problem. Anytime ^_^