RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

The answer is buy a Nikon lens.

pila

The 105mm Nikon on a Nikon body is a classic.
I love Tamron and Sigma and Tokina.
But u can’t ignore classic.
It is an all time Favorite combo. Nikon on Nikon!!!

dpfoto Loc: Cape Coral, FL

I NEVER buy 3rd party lenses. I have Nikon cameras, and all of my lenses are NIKON. I won't take the risk of 3rd party lenses.

RichardSM Loc: Back in Texas

I’m the same with Canon.

Carl1024 Loc: Kaneohe, HI 96744

I own the 90mm f/2.8 & use it on both my Canon 5d M2 & 7D, i'm a hobbyist is HI
………………………………………...message ends...…………………………………………………………...

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

I have used the Nikon 105mm Macro and am a firm believer in sticking with the same manufacturer of lens and camera whether it be Nikon or Canon. You are guaranteed compatability of all features and definite quality.

cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

B&H has the Nikon for about $900, not $1900, and one open box item for less.

SAVH Loc: La Jolla, CA

I have the Nikon 105 and use it on my D-850. I am extremely happy with it. It is fast, sharp and convenient.

Scotty

n4jee Loc: New Bern, NC

I don't have either, but would buy the Nikon lens. Because there are people like me that would not consider an aftermarket lens, there will always be a better market for the manufacturers product. That makes it easier to sell when you no longer have a use for it. That is neither right nor wrong, it's just fact.

gouldopfl

I have had both the Canon EF 100 macro and the Tamron SP 90mm. I have both FF and crop. For close up I use my crop sensor. Great results from my Tamron 90mm which is one of the top rated. I could not see enough of a difference and the Tamron was much cheaper so I returned the Canon

jno

Correct name of magazine is N-Photo.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Neither...

I would recommend a third possibility... The Sigma 105mm f/2.8 OS USD Macro lens is a better value than either of the above.... currently on sale for $469 (reg. $969). That's almost $200 less than the Tamron and nearly half the price of the Micro-Nikkor.

According to this article, the Sigma 105mm also has much better image quality than the Micro-Nikkor 105mm: https://petapixel.com/2020/04/15/macro-lens-test-canon-nikon-sony-laowa-sigma-and-tamron-compared/ Aside from image quality, the Sigma pretty much matches the Micro-Nikkor feature for feature. The Sigma might even have a more useful focus limiter and better image stabilization.

Frankly, I was surprised at the above lens test comparison. The Micro-Nikkor 105mm has near cult status reputation. I can't help but wonder if there was a problem with the example used in those tests. Most macro lenses from any manufacturer are better than that! OTOH, the Micro-Nikkor 105mm is one of the oldest designs in that comparison. (The Sony and Canon lenses in article are only useful for comparison sake, since neither can be used on a Nikon F-mount camera.)

I use Canon gear, including their earlier EF 100mm f/2.8 USM macro lens (not the newer L/IS version). Other macro I use include the Tamron 60mm f/2 (crop only); a vintage, manual focus only Tamron SP 90mm; Canon 180mm f/3.5L USM macro, and TS-E 45mm f/2.8 Tilt-Shift (for small product photography... I've also used the TS-E 90mm f/2.8 in the past, but don't currently have one). I use a number of macro extension tubes to do close-ups with a variety of other, non-macro lenses, too.

If I were shopping for a macro lens today, the Sigma 105mm OS HSM would be right at the top of my list!

Toment Loc: FL, IL

Tammy👍

EastWest

I have the Nikon (#1) and I love it. Sharp, pretty good to the edge, plays nice with my D850. I really wanted the 2.8 for portraits but the dof is really shallow when in close. It seems to like f7.1 best.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

If the 2.8 is anything like the old 105 F2.5 that I used for so many years on my film and digital Nikons, BUY IT!