Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon vs. Sigma 105 Macro
Jun 9, 2015 16:04:44   #
mikedent Loc: Florida
 
Any feedback on image quality or other features of Nikon vs Sigma 105 2.8 lenses, both with OS? Using D7100. Used Nikon is about same price as new Sigma now with rebate. Thanks!

Reply
Jun 9, 2015 16:19:18   #
oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA
 
mikedent wrote:
Any feedback on image quality or other features of Nikon vs Sigma 105 2.8 lenses, both with OS? Using D7100. Used Nikon is about same price as new Sigma now with rebate. Thanks!


I use both the Nikon and Tokina and find DXO accurate for them so its probably ok for Sigma also.


(Download)

Reply
Jun 9, 2015 16:39:07   #
LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field
 
mikedent wrote:
Any feedback on image quality or other features of Nikon vs Sigma 105 2.8 lenses, both with OS? Using D7100. Used Nikon is about same price as new Sigma now with rebate. Thanks!


You might try posting this in the UHH True Macro forum. There are several users of both lenses. I can only speak of the Nikkor--it's a fine lens, but then again, I like the additional AF limiter selection on the Sigma and the lower cost. I would seriously consider that lens. Nikkor lenses do hold their value as well as any.... with respect to resale. I've sold lenses for more than I paid for them new--but then I had them for awhile.

Reply
 
 
Jun 9, 2015 17:57:37   #
mikedent Loc: Florida
 
UHH True Macro forum...Thanks, you're right, I should try there also!

Reply
Jun 9, 2015 19:12:33   #
Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada
 
The Nikon 105 mm lens was a favourite for me for ten years. It's an incredible macro lens. I still use it but I use it on a bellows instead of standalone.

It was eventually replaced with a Sigma 150mm macro and a Sigma 180 mm macro. Those two lenses are incredible in terms of sharpness and image quality. The longer one is rather heavy and the diameter is too great for my Nikon macro flash and my ring flash. The 150 mm is more compact and lighter and accepts both flash units.

I've never tried the Sigma 105 mm but based on my experience with the other two longer ones, my hunch is that it's probably a good lens. But, since the cost difference isn't that much I'd opt for the Nikon instead. It's probably worth more overall particularly if you try it sell it later.

One thing I did learn over the decades is that third party lenses are not all the same even from the same makers. Every company has excellent ones and questionable ones.

I also have the 150-500 mm lens from Sigma and the quality of that one is definitely not up to the same standard as the two macros I have from them.

Reply
Jun 9, 2015 22:42:47   #
traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.
 
mikedent wrote:
Any feedback on image quality or other features of Nikon vs Sigma 105 2.8 lenses, both with OS? Using D7100. Used Nikon is about same price as new Sigma now with rebate. Thanks!



Reply
Jun 10, 2015 09:02:33   #
mikedent Loc: Florida
 
Thanks for all the tips. Tough choice, both have great image quality, may come down to price. Not real worried about future selling value. Maybe I just have GAS??

Reply
 
 
Jun 10, 2015 17:00:31   #
planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
 
I have the sigma 105 and love it. This is one of the pics I took with it, shot earlier this year at an orchid show at Missouri Botanical Garden. It was shot with f/4.5, 1/400 sec and hotshoe flash.


(Download)

Reply
Jun 10, 2015 17:04:07   #
mikedent Loc: Florida
 
Beautiful orchid!

Reply
Jun 10, 2015 17:44:04   #
Haydon
 
Worth mentioning is Nikon's version will DEFINITELTY have better resale value despite what DXo has determined optically.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.