[huma11]

Hi, I am very tempted by the Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro, largely because of its price. This would be my first dedicated macro lens - I have a Sigma 75-300 APO macro at present. Is this a good decision for a novice macro photographer?! Or, would the additional cost for a Canon 100mm be worth it? Or then again how about the Sigma 105mm? Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Hugh

ps there may already be a thread on this - if so, please direct me.

[neil brown]

I cant comment on the others but i have the canon and it is a superb lens though i have recently found better results when using manual focus. They should be coming down in price after the launch of the 100mm is, and am sure you would get a good deal on second hand if you looked
cheers
neil

[rob lee]

there is a test lurking somewhere on the net that compares these 3 lenses. I`m sure if you were to google something like Tamron v Canon & Sigma macro you would get a result. the basic conclusion was that the Tamron was virtually as good as the Canon as regards image quality but the Canon was far better built & more ergonomically pleasing & the new USM model with I.S. improves on this even more so. I have never used any of these 3 lenses so am just repeating what i`ve read. Do the search.
Rob.

[huma11]

Hi Rob, Yes - I've seen that review, but there is nothing like hearing about first hand experiences. I was just wondering what other users think? Thanks for taking the time to reply. Cheers, Hugh

[Smudger01]

Hi Hugh..

I have used/owned the Sigma 105mm and its a cracking bit of kit, though the extending barrel can be a bit of a pain, but image quality is superb, I've since moved on to the Sigma 150mm with no moving parts and its a dream to work with. Love mine to bits so much so i've dedicated a Canon D40 body to it. I've friends who use the Tamron 90mm and the results are extremely good but I've never used it myself. Can't comment on the Canon as most of my friends use either Sigma or Tamron. Should I need to replace my macro lens then another 150mm would be my first choice. However if your on a tight budget then the Tamron has to be value for money, you could also compliment it with a Sigma EM-140 Ringflash (not a true ringflash but a good extra to any macro set-up) for the price of the Canon 100mm of Sigma 150mm.

Tamron 90mm around £260 + Ringflash around £260
Sigma 105mm around £320
Sigma 150mm around £600
Canon 100mm around £630

[huma11]

Geoff, Many thanks - very helpful indeed. Hugh

[Steve Babbs]

I have the Tamron 90mm, reading reviews it did seem there was very little difference in the quality. so I went for price. It's great but I regret not going for a bigger one, probably the Sigma 150mm. Of course it depends on what you want to photograph. On the flash front, the built in camera flash works remarkably well as a macro flash. So I'd try that first before splashing on on a macro flash.

[huma11]

Hi Steve, The Tamron does seem a good deal - pound for pound. Cheers, Hugh

[I4ani]

Macro lenses come in many sizes, eg 50/60, 90/100/105, 150, 180/200 mm,to name but some.The shorter the focal length the closer you need to get to your subject, the longer lenses allow you a greater working distance. Don't buy on price, buy the right tool for the job or the subjects you are thinking of photographing.
Sigma macros are held in very high regard, in particular the 150.
regards.

[billy]

I have the tamron and its a great wee lens, sharp and the boketh is brilliant. can hunt a wee bit but just switch over to manual focus ( which you will use 90% of the time anyway).

[Steve Babbs]

Originally Posted by huma11

Hi Steve, The Tamron does seem a good deal - pound for pound. Cheers, Hugh

It is, but if you're mainly going to photograph butterflies/dragonflies, the Sigma 150 or 180 are probably a better bet, although they are considerably more expensive, unless you're very good at stalking. I find I still use my Sigma 70 -300 APO quite a bit, for its extra 'reach'.

[huma11]

A bit of a dilemma now then - whether to save and wait for the Sigma 150mm or to jump straight in with the Tamron?! Cheers, Hugh

[tjsimonsen]

I think that there's very little to choose from between all the true macros when it comes to IQ. So it's up to you if you want to splash out the extra cash for the better build quality of the Canon. For me the internal focus system and very fast AF with FTM swung it.

As for macro flash. I used a EZ ring flash back in the film days, but that doesn't work with dSLRs. Today I use my Speedlite 420EX with a Stofen Omnibounce diffuser. It works almost as well as my old ring flash did. But I am probably going to get a Speedlite 24EX Twin lite - one of these days.....

Thomas

[Steve Babbs]

Originally Posted by huma11

A bit of a dilemma now then - whether to save and wait for the Sigma 150mm or to jump straight in with the Tamron?! Cheers, Hugh

If you're mainly using it for insects, like me, if you go for the Tamron you'll probably end up still wanting the Sigma as well. It'll end up more expensive.

[huma11]

Thanks everyone. I must say this is a difficult (albeit in the course of things a not "too heavy") decision. I think I need to get some of these in my hands, so as to get a feel for each lens before I rush in. Cheers, Hugh

[huma11]

After all that, I decided to buy the Tamron. Got it from MPB at a great price and in near mint condition - so quite a saving. My thinking went - as macro photography is always always going to be a sideline to my main interest in bird photography I could not really justify (especially to my wife!) the additional cost of a sigma 150. Been playing with and it seems just the ticket. Thanks for all of your comments and advice. Hugh

[tjsimonsen]

Originally Posted by huma11

My thinking went - as macro photography is always always going to be a sideline to my main interest in bird photography

Let's hear that again in five years or so.....
Seriously, you may get totally smitten by it - or then again you may not

Thomas

[Overread]

Originally Posted by tjsimonsen

Let's hear that again in five years or so.....
Seriously, you may get totally smitten by it - or then again you may not

Thomas

Heh didn't even take 5 years for me - half a year and I was hooked - year and a half later and I end up with 3 macro lenses!

[tjsimonsen]

Originally Posted by Overread

Heh didn't even take 5 years for me - half a year and I was hooked - year and a half later and I end up with 3 macro lenses!

Yeah, you are right. But I guess my point was that if the OP isn't hooked after five years, he'll never be.

Thomas

[rick ward]

well lads/lasses you have made my mind up its a sigma 150, then l can get rid of screw on
macro filters for my moth butterfly shots for next year, roll on...
Sony 230 450 55v 18-55 55-200-70-300 150-500 sigma oh and my 18-250mmsony great
Plus redundant pentax film cameras (6) and a bag of optics top class ones at that 300m*f4
200mmf2.5 alsorts of pentax zooms plus a little canon ixus 130 great for top pocket 14meg