Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: armand on March 10, 2015, 02:37:57 pm
-
With the current sales I decided the get a proper macro lens for the Nikon. I don't do much macro but I might be tempted for more if I get one.
I had my eye on the classic Nikon 105 F2.8 VR but I just noticed a Tamron 180 F3.5 for the same price.
The Tamron is a little bigger and heavier (by 100g or so) but has longer working distance for 1:1 (roughly 45cm vs 30 cm).
The Nikon is a little lighter and significantly more versatile (portrait maybe, easier for landscape, F2.8 with VR). The 180mm for portraits would have been very interesting but at F3.5 with slow focus it offers nothing compared to the Nikon 70-200 F4 which I already have.
Any experience with both? I would most likely get the Nikon unless I'm missing something else.
-
Just note that from my use of the 105VR: sharp (but 85/1.4g and 105/2 DC are sharper), good bokeh, ok CA control, but AF can hunt like crazy (like full rack in/out) at close distance, say under 3''
-
VR and auto focus are unnecessary for macro, IMHO. I bought the MF version of the 105 from KEH.com for about $150. Its as sharp as any lens I have ever used.
-
I haven't used the Tamron 180 but I think I will give it a look. I've been using the Tamron 90 Macro and the images from that lens have a lovely quality to them. For those that care about such things, the bokeh is beautiful, which helps give the images that lovely look. I've had other macros but this is my go to macro now. I don't shoot a lot of insects or critters so the working distance isn't as much of a concern.