Macro lens advice: I'm in the market for a macro lens, probably in the 100mm range. I'd like to get the Nikon 105mm, but would rather spend less if a third party lens would be as...

photophool Loc: Grosse Pointe Park, MI

I'm in the market for a macro lens, probably in the 100mm range. I'd like to get the Nikon 105mm, but would rather spend less if a third party lens would be as sharp. A member in my photo club panned the Tamron 90mm as "too soft." He's a studio pro, but doesn't shoot macro. I would appreciate your comments on Sigma and Tamron vs. Nikon. I'll save for the Nikon if it is the best of the bunch. I don't want to go cheap and regret it later.

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

From the images posted by a Tokina user on this forum, I would include that. I don't use it-- I have the Nikkor 105g. It's a great lens-- but if I was buying today, I would think about the Tokina and the $300 or so in savings. The other thing to consider is VR (or IS as Canon calls it). A lot of my macro is hand-held and this feature helps. Of course, you'll have some users on here who produce fantastic results and don't use it.

photophool Loc: Grosse Pointe Park, MI

LoneRangeFinder wrote:

From the images posted by a Tokina user on this forum, I would include that. I don't use it-- I have the Nikkor 105g. It's a great lens-- but if I was buying today, I would think about the Tokina and the $300 or so in savings. The other thing to consider is VR (or IS as Canon calls it). A lot of my macro is hand-held and this feature helps. Of course, you'll have some users on here who produce fantastic results and don't use it.

Thanks for your speedy reply. Yes, I'd consider a Tokina lens, I just couldn't think of the name as I made my post. I've done my share of macro some years ago with a Nikon F and the 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor P lens. That's why I'd prefer a longer lens.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

The macro pics posted on this forum with the Tokina 100-mm macro lens are as good as any, you certainly would not be sacrificing image quality if you were to choose the Tokina lens.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Two years ago, I upgraded from a Nikkor 105D (A-F but no VR) to a Nikkor 105G (A-F & VR). My "keep rate" improved dramatically.

I do not know if the Tokina 100-mm or the Sigma 105-mm macro lenses have image stabilization, but if I were currently in the market, I would seriously consider either lens.

P.S. - I still have my Nikkor 55-mm macro lens, purchased new in the early 1970s. Works well for inert, tabletop macro photography.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

All of the macro shots on this site http://500px.com/martinfisher were taken with the Tokina 100-mm macro lens. It does not have a focusing motor but my camera does, D7000 so it works just fine for auto focusing. My Tokina 100-mm has no VR or IS, but have found using 1/200-sec shutter duration will stop all camera shake, even after a pot of coffee. $490.00