planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I've been thinking about getting a nice f/2.8 Tamron 90mm or Sony 100mm Macro lens. I can't afford anything faster than that...and it would still be stretching the budget. I noticed there is about a 10 1/2" difference in Minimum Focusing Distance between the two (1.2" vs 11.8" according to what I read), the Sony being the shorter. How much does MFD really matter? I mean, to me it doesn't seem practical to point the camera less than 2" from whatever you're going to shoot...anyways, wouldn't it be blocking most of the light? Are there any recommendations for either of these lenses or alternatives?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

How long will the insect stick around if you are at 1.2" compared to how long it will stay at 11.8".
I have not checked those numbers but 1.2" for 1:1 macro with a 100mm lens just doesn't sound right to me, but I don't know that particular lens.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Your Sony SLT-A77V has an APS-C sensor, so the MFD for the
Tamron 90-mm macro = 135-mm = 5.3-inches; and for the
Sony 100-mm macro = 150-mm = 5.9-inches.

These MFDs are directly related to focal length & sensor size, regardless of manufacturer.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

I invite you to view the UHH True Macro-Photography Forum at http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-102-1.html .
The Macro Forum is the place to ask about macro equipment & macro techniques.

To place Macro Forum on your UHH home page, you must subscribe here: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/section_list.jsp .

jlefebvre Loc: Toronto, Ontario

I am by no means an expert, but I have done some research and opted for the Tamron 90mm and I very please with it. Got the newer one with the VC auto focus feature. I have a Nikon D7000 body.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I have been looking at other listings and it appears it was a misprint. Sony lists it as 1' 2.4" (35cm). Sorry. I should have realized it was wrong. I also looked at Tonika (know nothing about them) and Sigma.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

The Tamron 90-mm macro, the Tonika 100-mm macro, and the Sigma 105-mm macro lenses are all excellent. We have macro-photographers within the True Macro-Photography Forum who own & use these lenses. The Macro Forum is the place to ask your macro questions.

Chris Knight Loc: Ayden, nc

I have that lense and am very happy with it...

jim quist Loc: Missouri

I have a 100 macro. I like it. but when I photograph hornets I wish I had the 180 so I could be further away. Using a 2.8 will leave so little in focus that you are better off shooting at f11 or so.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

You mean as far as DOF?

A-PeeR Loc: Houston, Texas

I think Jim means he has to shoot the 100mm wide open to get enough light in to illuminate the subject. This leads to a shallow DoF. F11 will increase DoF but make it difficult to illuminate the subject without a long shutter speed. While this is certainly doable, one needs to shoot a static subject, one a calm day, with the camera bolted to a tripod or monopod. This limits what, when, and where one can shoot. A solution is to use a diffused speed light for illumination. Using a 180 will back the photographer up and allowing more ambient light in. The minimum working distance for 1:1 (macro) photography on a 180 is about 11 inches. While this is an improvement over the minimum working distance of a 100mm, around 5.5 inches it's not exactly a light vacuum and illumination gains due to distance from the subject are somewhat negated by the need for faster shutter speed to control motion blur. Typically on a bright day I can stop down a 180 at 1/200 - 1/160 of a second shutter speed to ~f8(ish) and get decent illumination. DoF is still shallow at this aperture. Beginner solutions to this illumination problem are slower shutter speed/ tripod setup or diffused speedlight. I prefer the diffused speed light option as shooting handheld allows much more freedom in the field.

If anyone is interested in shooting macro and wants to bounce ideas, shooting strategies, equipment requirements/benefits, etc visiting the true macro forum is a good place to post. UHH has some excellent macro photographers with a wealth of experience and a broad range of interests.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Experienced macro-photographer with new Tamron 90-mm macro lens:
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-187046-1.html

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

Is it worth paying an extra $250 for the newer version model 004 vs the older model 272(e?)

RaydancePhoto

I have had the Tamron 90mm Macro and it is an excellent lens. I not shoot Sony and have opted for the Minolta 100mm Macro, at least as good as the Tamron. AF is not that important for macro, using in manual focus 99% of the time for me. Where the AF comes in handy is using the lens as a portrait lens, which it excels at.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I think I'm going to order an Amazon.com gift card with my credit card points, if possible use my Pro-100 rebate and get the Sigma 105 for $669 (probably from Adorama). The price is good through 3/31 (I called Sigma) so even if it takes 2-3 weeks to get the card I'll still be OK. After the credits, the lens should cost less than $250. I heard that the focus is a little slow and noisy, but it's really sharp. I guess I'll sign up for the macro section so i can start learning more about technique, etc.