Posted by Reed Bowman on April 29, 2009 at 12:59 PM
I have an older Tokina 90mm macro and am looking to upgrade. I'm torn between getting the Nikon 105 and one of the off-brand 180mm, such as Tamron or Sigma. All have great optics and I llike the idea of the longer focal length, especially since I already have a 90mm. Does anyone have experience with either the Tamron or Sigma 180 mm macro lens? Are they equal to the Nikons?
I have no experience with the Sigma 180, but I do own the 150. I am extremely satisfied with the IQ, even wide open. While the bokeh has been described as "nervous" and not quite as smooth in certain situations, it is pin sharp.
Something that you might want to consider is that in order to achieve internal focusing, manufacturers play games with the effective focal length, shortening it in order to get to 1:1 magnification. Third party manufacturers appear to be less disciplined in this area compared OEM. One would expect that a 105 lens by Nikon would have the same working distance as a third party lens (theoretically) at or near 1:1, but you will find that to get the same image magnification, your working distance will be a bit shorter with the third party lens. Both shorten the effective focal length, but you will find the third party lens mfgr will shorten it to a greater degree.
I can't put my finger on the article where I read this, but I remember that it was a comparison between Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and possibly others.
Some complain about focusing speed. I have used my 150, which is the later model with internal focus and HSM motor, with a 1.4x extender to photograph a lacrosse game in a pinch, and found 99% of my shots in focus. In low contrast situations the focus will hunt a bit, but that is to be expected.
Discussion
6 repliesRead this
http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/sigma_180mm_macro_review.htm
I think you can't make a wrong decision.
I have no experience with the Sigma 180, but I do own the 150. I am extremely satisfied with the IQ, even wide open. While the bokeh has been described as "nervous" and not quite as smooth in certain situations, it is pin sharp.
Something that you might want to consider is that in order to achieve internal focusing, manufacturers play games with the effective focal length, shortening it in order to get to 1:1 magnification. Third party manufacturers appear to be less disciplined in this area compared OEM. One would expect that a 105 lens by Nikon would have the same working distance as a third party lens (theoretically) at or near 1:1, but you will find that to get the same image magnification, your working distance will be a bit shorter with the third party lens. Both shorten the effective focal length, but you will find the third party lens mfgr will shorten it to a greater degree.
I can't put my finger on the article where I read this, but I remember that it was a comparison between Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and possibly others.
Some complain about focusing speed. I have used my 150, which is the later model with internal focus and HSM motor, with a 1.4x extender to photograph a lacrosse game in a pinch, and found 99% of my shots in focus. In low contrast situations the focus will hunt a bit, but that is to be expected.