Another WHAT Lens Question.

[russellsnr]

Hi, Recently sold the older version of a Tamron 90mm macro lens and I want/need to replace it, I use Canon gear and cannot make my mind on the 60mm macro or the 100mm macro or the Sigma 105mm macro. I use a tripod so IS not really needed. Any input please? Thankyou, Russ.

[Stagecoach]

Hi, Recently sold the older version of a Tamron 90mm macro lens and I want/need to replace it, I use Canon gear and cannot make my mind on the 60mm macro or the 100mm macro or the Sigma 105mm macro. I use a tripod so IS not really needed. Any input please? Thankyou, Russ.

Why did you sell the Tamron 90mm?

My reason for asking is that if it 'lacked' in something, whatever you replace it with would ideally need to have what it 'lacked'.

[billtils]

Why did you sell the Tamron 90mm?

My reason for asking is that if it 'lacked' in something, whatever you replace it with would ideally need to have what it 'lacked'.

Good question Grahame! Is this a case of GAS? Or was there a problem in the quality of what you were achieving? FWIW, I have the updated Tamron and it's a very good lens. I have compared what I get from it with what a "photo buddy" posts on an other forum, using a Canon macro and 5D3 and there's nothing in it that either of us can see.

In the interests of full disclosure, I'm thinking about trading the Tamron because I get as good wildlife close-ups with the Nikon 300mm PF + 1.4 TC and it saves me carrying two lenses and switching them.

[russellsnr]

Why did you sell the Tamron 90mm?

My reason for asking is that if it 'lacked' in something, whatever you replace it with would ideally need to have what it 'lacked'.

Hi, I sold it because although it gave very good images I found the barrel to be a bit of a P I T A because it as you probably no moved forward and back to gain focus where a lens like the Canon 100mm all works within the barrel. Hope that makes sense? Thanks, Russ.

[Stagecoach]

I found the barrel to be a bit of a P I T A because it as you probably no moved forward and back to gain focus

A quick search suggests the Sigma 105 does the same but there may be different models or I may be looking at things incorrectly?

[xpatUSA]

A quick search suggests the Sigma 105 does the same but there may be different models or I may be looking at things incorrectly?

I own this model; it is well-regarded:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/len...-macro/review/

There is also one with OS for a few dollars more:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sigma/105mm-f2.8-ex-dg-macro/review/

Both extend for focusing.

... and an f/1.4 ART model which would be cheap at half the price:

https://www.imaging-resource.com/len...sm-art/review/

[er, just read that the ART model is not a Macro, but it does focus internally, i.e. does not extend it's huge front element.]

[rpcrowe]

My Tamron 90mm f/2.8 just quit working. Oh well! It was the lens Tamron issued before they came out with the present 90mm macro (DG Model) and I bought it, used over ten years ago and only paid one hundred USD for it then. So, I have no big complaints. The problem with the lens is that it won't stop down when shooting so everything is at f/2.8,

I picked up a used Canon 100mm (non-L) macro at a really good price which suits me just fine. I even use it with the MC-11 adapter on my Sony A6500. The AF is not at all good with that combination but, I shoot in manual focus mode and it works real well.

The L version is "supposed" to be a bit sharper but, I have also read that it is very difficult to tell the difference in images captured by the two lenses and the used non-L was a LOT cheaper...

[DanK]

It really depends on how you intend to use it.

I have had the 60mm for many years but virtually never us it. The working distance is simply too short. In addition, background blur (as distinct from DOF) increases with focal length. What a shorter length does give you is greater magnification for a given amount of extension. That's the only reason I haven't yet sold it.

I agree about not want an externally focusing lens.

If you are interested in bugs, I think the first question is focal length--something in the 90-105mm range, vs. 150-180. Thereis no right answer. Some people like the longer working distance of the longer lens, while other people prefer the smaller size and lower weight of the shorter ones. I am in the latter camp. My standard macro lens is the 100mm L.

I haven't used the non-L 100mm, but everything I have read is consistent with what Richard wrote: the optical quality of the two lenses isn't that different. The L has the advantage of hybrid IS. Conventional IS is of little value because it corrects for angular motion. The major problem at macro distances is motion parallel to the sensor, which most in-lens IS systems don't offset. Canon's hybrid IS does. In practice, I am not sure how much that helps me because I use monopod much of the time.

[russellsnr]

Thankyou for the replies. Dan, I now mostly only take images indoors so thinking the Canon 100mm is my best bet and from what I have read a very good lens for good prices if you look around, also always now on a tripod so IS not really needed. Thanks again for all the replies. Russ.