Thinking about buying a macro lens...

[BackdoorArts]

Another lens to consider is the Sigma 105 f2.8 , it has OS, and is cheaper than the Nikkor. It is getting very good reviews, with some saying its better than the Nikkor.
​

I saw that, but when I saw the 'DG' marking I thought it was only for cropped sensors (Sigma's use of 'DG' for Digital Glass and 'DC' for cropped sensors has confused me since the beginning - you'd think they'd come up with something less alike). Thanks for the heads up. Seems to be about the same price, but they're running an instant savings thing thru the end of June, and folks have this in stock while the Nikon seems to be backordered everywhere.

I did some more reading yesterday afternoon, and I'm thinking a 105mm is probably the better way to go. The reviews on the Sigma seem to be very positive, and my standby lens comparison site test against the Nikon 105mm shows it's at least as sharp and has less CA (the Sigma lens used is a Canon mount - if that matters). Was checking on the B&H site and realized I have almost $100 in B&H bucks, and this will net me about $30 back. NAPP membership nets me free ground shipping, which should get it here tomorrow (nice to be that close). You may have sufficiently twisted my arm.

Now to write to Sigma to talk about those abbreviations...

 

[Marcel]

I saw that, but when I saw the 'DG' marking I thought it was only for cropped sensors (Sigma's use of 'DG' for Digital Glass and 'DC' for cropped sensors has confused me since the beginning - you'd think they'd come up with something less alike). Thanks for the heads up. Seems to be about the same price, but they're running an instant savings thing thru the end of June, and folks have this in stock while the Nikon seems to be backordered everywhere.

I did some more reading yesterday afternoon, and I'm thinking a 105mm is probably the better way to go. The reviews on the Sigma seem to be very positive, and my standby lens comparison site test against the Nikon 105mm shows it's at least as sharp and has less CA (the Sigma lens used is a Canon mount - if that matters). Was checking on the B&H site and realized I have almost $100 in B&H bucks, and this will net me about $30 back. NAPP membership nets me free ground shipping, which should get it here tomorrow (nice to be that close). You may have sufficiently twisted my arm.

Now to write to Sigma to talk about those abbreviations...

Hi Jake,

My Sigma 105 2.8 is the older model and it doesn't have Optical Stabilization. But, it is marked DG and is an FX lens. I like it very much and am more than happy with the quality. I find it quite smaller than the equivalent Nikon that a friend of mine has.

 

[hark]

I was just looking at the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 on B&H and read through the questions that were asked. One of the answers says:

The lens is not a true 2.8 lens as you focus the lens the aperture shifts due to the barrel extension all the way to 4.5 The lens primary function is to be a macro lens. I purchased this with hopes of getting a 105mm 2.8 portrait lens.

Although I was disappointed as mentioned above, the lens is tack sharp, has excellent color rendition, and contrast. The lens has a good construction, and came with a nice case and lens hood.

It is listed as an f/2.8 though.

 

[jwstl]

I was just looking at the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 on B&H and read through the questions that were asked. One of the answers says:



It is listed as an f/2.8 though.

That's an incomplete answer. The truth is this occurs in almost all Macro/Micro lenses including the Nikon 105. It's a true 2.8 at infinity but as you focus closer the effective aperture does change. Read Thom Hogan's review of the Nikkor 105 for a bit more info: http://www.bythom.com/105AFSlens.htm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[hark]

That's an incomplete answer. The truth is this occurs in almost all Macro/Micro lenses including the Nikon 105. It's a true 2.8 at infinity but as you focus closer the effective aperture does change. Read Thom Hogan's review of the Nikkor 105 for a bit more info: Nikon 105mm f/2.8G AF-S VR Review by Thom Hogan


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Thanks for the explanation! I don't own any macro primes (only a zoom macro which isn't a true macro) so I don't know how a true macro functions. I was concerned because the guy said, "I purchased this with hopes of getting a 105mm 2.8 portrait lens." To me his comment made me wonder if he wasn't quite happy with its use even as a portrait lens. I appreciate the information!

 

[BackdoorArts]

The Sigma arrived today. Really lousy day to go outside and shoot, but I'm happy with what I've been able to get inside (nothing worth sharing, just test shots). That said, if I'm disappointed with one thing it's the noise from the Optical Stabilizer system. I've dealt with the one in the 150-500mm, which is loud with a perceptible "clunk" when turning on and off. While it's a little annoying, I figure for a lens that long it's going to need some significant stabilization. While the 105's isn't as bad, it's still a lot louder than I would have thought. I'd seen a video of this in a review of a Canon copy, so it wasn't entirely unexpected. It'll make it hard to sneak up on bugs, but I was able to get some tack sharp photos handheld at 1/15 sec, so it's doing its job.

 

[RockyNH_RIP]

The Sigma arrived today. Really lousy day to go outside and shoot, but I'm happy with what I've been able to get inside (nothing worth sharing, just test shots). That said, if I'm disappointed with one thing it's the noise from the Optical Stabilizer system. I've dealt with the one in the 150-500mm, which is loud with a perceptible "clunk" when turning on and off. While it's a little annoying, I figure for a lens that long it's going to need some significant stabilization. While the 105's isn't as bad, it's still a lot louder than I would have thought. I'd seen a video of this in a review of a Canon copy, so it wasn't entirely unexpected. It'll make it hard to sneak up on bugs, but I was able to get some tack sharp photos handheld at 1/15 sec, so it's doing its job.

Looks like you got the "new" version of one of teh ones I am looking at..
Glad to hear it is working!!! Now bring us BUGS!

Pat in NH

 

[WhiteLight]

Congrats Jake.. You got the Sigma 105?

 

[BackdoorArts]

Yes, the 105mm macro with OS

 

[Rick M]

The VR on the Nikon 105 is very loud also. When I first got it thought there was something wrong with it. I think it's due to the heavy elements.

 

[Phillydog1958]

Enjoy it. It's a fun lens -- Nikon or Sigma.