Tokina 100mm Macro or Sigma 105mm Macro?

desmobob

Senior Member
I always figure that if I'm going to be doing any "serious" macro shooting, it will certainly be off a tripod.

I just received one of the old-style Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 lenses yesterday. My other two macro lenses are both Nikkor MF models... the 55mm f/2.8 and 200mm f/4 Micro-Nikkors. When I was interested in macro shooting years ago, I tended to use reversed wide-angle lenses and a PB-4 set-up. I wanted something more convenient for practical use now.

I haven't had a chance to do anything other than test it for function. I have a couple of third-party lenses in focal lengths or styles I rarely use, like a cheap Russian fish-eye, but this Tokina is my first main-stream third party lens I've owned since I had a Sigma 300mm APO back in the 1980s.

If I had any thoughts of doing hand-held macro, I would certainly choose the Sigma.
 

JoeyND

Senior Member
I always figure that if I'm going to be doing any "serious" macro shooting, it will certainly be off a tripod.

I just received one of the old-style Tokina AT-X Pro 100mm f/2.8 lenses yesterday. My other two macro lenses are both Nikkor MF models... the 55mm f/2.8 and 200mm f/4 Micro-Nikkors. When I was interested in macro shooting years ago, I tended to use reversed wide-angle lenses and a PB-4 set-up. I wanted something more convenient for practical use now.

I haven't had a chance to do anything other than test it for function. I have a couple of third-party lenses in focal lengths or styles I rarely use, like a cheap Russian fish-eye, but this Tokina is my first main-stream third party lens I've owned since I had a Sigma 300mm APO back in the 1980s.

If I had any thoughts of doing hand-held macro, I would certainly choose the Sigma.

Thank You for the info! I handhold a lot for macro insects! Cant wait till the weather warms up & the insects emerge!
 
Top