Compare Macro Lenses. Which one?

[gns1497]

I like the Nikkor lens, but $350 is a big difference. Any opinions for/against out there?


Sigma Telephoto 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Autofocus Lens for Nikon AF

or

Nikon Telephoto AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR


Pros/Cons? (Other than price)

[NaturesPixel]

i have not ever tried these but obvious is that Nikon has VR and the sigma is lacking the OS... which from experience with my sigma 50mm doing 1:1 ratio i could use the VR/OS when i don't have my tripod on hand

[ELAY]

The other thing is that the Nikon will autofocus quicker and quieter with the internal motor in the lens.

This probably won't be an issue for macro, but if you use the lens for other stuff you would probably notice a difference.

EL

[jdepould]

I am absolutely in LOVE with VR. It isn't as useful for macro, since you SHOULD be using a tripod, but if you plan on using it for anything else that you'd hand-hold then VR is a godsend.

[gns1497]

So basically you guys think its worth the extra $350 to get the Nikon lens? I have the 18-200mm DX AF VRII and a 50mm AF 1.8 lens, so I may use it for more than macro, but I dont necessarily have to. But you have a point, VR would be nice to have on it.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by gns1497

So basically you guys think its worth the extra $350 to get the Nikon lens? I have the 18-200mm DX AF VRII and a 50mm AF 1.8 lens, so I may use it for more than macro, but I dont necessarily have to. But you have a point, VR would be nice to have on it.

It really all depends on what kind of shooting you do. A new macro isn't high on my list of glass to purchase, but everyone is different and my setup is obviously not the same as yours.

[ELAY]

Depends on your budget too, obviously. For me, just being able to buy decent macro in that focal length would be nice -- while the VR and internal motor would be nice too, they would put the 105 out of my reach. For the extra $350, there are some other things I want more.

Saw this on eBay -- might be worth a look. The lens does get raves from nostalgic gearheads.

LINK

EL

[ff151]

This is what I was told, and what I have now...

I have the 80-200 Nikkor 2.8 (non VR). One of my other forums (fishing/photography) there was a guy that used this lense with extension tubes (approx. $200 Cdn)

I bought 63mm extension tubes and this is what I was able to achieve same night (I am also new to DSLR photography). This saved me a bunch of money from buying a specific Macro lense and still being able to use the fast glass that I have.... I don't know if this helped you

[ryan s]

EL hit it on the head with his link. The old-school Vivi's are great lenses for their performance (and not to mention their price!) Notice the 8-blade snappers? My 28/2.5 has the same count, making for some very pleasant OoF views (correct term? I hope )

Learn to love and cherish the jumbles of numbers on the sides...they are there for a reason which I just learned a couple weeks ago lol

[wulf]

Originally Posted by ryan s

... making for some very pleasant OoF views (correct term? I hope )

The term that seems to get most favour at the moment is bokeh (just so you know when you see that thrown around).

Wulf