difference between all these 105mm lenses??

L

LenspirationalPhotography

Senior Member
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Both Nikon lenses you have listed are the same. Between the Sigma and the Nikon, the Nikon will give you closer focus. Other then that, they are more or less the same spec wise. I would read some reviews to get more in-depth opinions ;)
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
LenspirationalPhotography said:
I am planning to buy a 105mm 1:1 macro lens soon- & am wondering what the differences in all these are, besides price. I don't want to spend extra $$ if the same lens is cheaper, like a $700 vs a $900 lens.. idk what the difference is. Here are the links below.


Nikon AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED Lens 2160 B&H

Nikon AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED Lens 2160 B&H

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS Macro Lens for Nikon AF Cameras
Click to expand...
The primary difference between the first two will be the warranty. The cheaper of the two is an import, the more expensive one comes with USA warranty.

The third one is a Sigma. That's the primary difference.

....
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
The primary difference between the first two will be the warranty. The cheaper of the two is an import, the more expensive one comes with USA warranty.

The third one is a Sigma. That's the primary difference.

....
Click to expand...

Good catch on the import/usa thing. You would think that B&H would give the lenses different stock numbers, but they don't.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
LenspirationalPhotography said:
Thanks everyone! I will go with the Nikon brand USA one as for $900 I definitely want a warranty!
Click to expand...
Well, just so we're absolutely clear read this statement by B&H that explains what they mean by "Import" (aka "Grey Market") and what they offer as a warranty for such items. I'm not trying to sway your decision one way or another, I just think you owe it to yourself to understand the what these terms mean and why they're important when making buying decisions in general.

....
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
BackdoorHippie has the Sigma...have you seen his macro photos? Spectacular. Stunning. Incredible. Those are some of the terms that come to mind. I have the Nikon--I went with the Nikon last fall when I took advantage of the body/lens combo sales for the holiday. Although I haven't used the Sigma, I don't think it lacks in quality. :) I don't think you'd be unhappy with the Sigma if the price is less expensive than the Nikon.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
hark said:
BackdoorHippie has the Sigma...have you seen his macro photos? Spectacular. Stunning. Incredible. Those are some of the terms that come to mind. I have the Nikon--I went with the Nikon last fall when I took advantage of the body/lens combo sales for the holiday. Although I haven't used the Sigma, I don't think it lacks in quality. :) I don't think you'd be unhappy with the Sigma if the price is less expensive than the Nikon.
Click to expand...
I'm not in the market but I've seen what the Sigma can do... I totally concur with that assessment.

....
 
L

LenspirationalPhotography

Senior Member
hark said:
BackdoorHippie has the Sigma...have you seen his macro photos? Spectacular. Stunning. Incredible. Those are some of the terms that come to mind. I have the Nikon--I went with the Nikon last fall when I took advantage of the body/lens combo sales for the holiday. Although I haven't used the Sigma, I don't think it lacks in quality. :) I don't think you'd be unhappy with the Sigma if the price is less expensive than the Nikon.
Click to expand...

No, I will go check the pictures from him out, so Nikon isn't as good as Sigma when it comes to Macro? I just want a 1:1 macro mens that can get super sharp in focus pictures of tiny tiny insects etc. So which would be best? Sigma or Nikon? I've heard awesome things about Sigma but have never owned a sigma lens.
 
S

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I bought the Tokina about 3 years ago because I was too cheap to spring for the Nikon. I've had several opportunities to get the Nikon since then for a couple of hundred bucks (factoring in the sale of the Tokina) and can't force myself to do it. The Tokina has great build quality and the Nikon is plastic (like my 85 1.8 and 24-85VR). And, I've convinced myself I don't need VR because I only shoot macro with it. IMO, it can hold its own with any 100/105 macro.
 
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
LenspirationalPhotography said:
No, I will go check the pictures from him out, so Nikon isn't as good as Sigma when it comes to Macro? I just want a 1:1 macro mens that can get super sharp in focus pictures of tiny tiny insects etc. So which would be best? Sigma or Nikon? I've heard awesome things about Sigma but have never owned a sigma lens.
Click to expand...

Both the Sigma and the Nikon are excellent. I don't perceive one as being superior to the other in this case as they are both stellar. When comparing other lenses such as the 24-70mm or 70-200mm, I'd pick the Nikon. But for the 105mm, they are both excellent. If my Nikon hadn't been on sale, I would have bought the Sigma...and had intended to. But the cost of the Nikon was so good--that's the only reason I went with it. No regrets on the Nikon, but I wouldn't have felt a Sigma was a lesser lens if I had chosen it. :)
 
L

LenspirationalPhotography

Senior Member
hark said:
Both the Sigma and the Nikon are excellent. I don't perceive one as being superior to the other in this case as they are both stellar. When comparing other lenses such as the 24-70mm or 70-200mm, I'd pick the Nikon. But for the 105mm, they are both excellent. If my Nikon hadn't been on sale, I would have bought the Sigma...and had intended to. But the cost of the Nikon was so good--that's the only reason I went with it. No regrets on the Nikon, but I wouldn't have felt a Sigma was a lesser lens if I had chosen it. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks! Where can I find backdoorhippies macro photos??

singlerosa said:
I bought the Tokina about 3 years ago because I was too cheap to spring for the Nikon. I've had several opportunities to get the Nikon since then for a couple of hundred bucks (factoring in the sale of the Tokina) and can't force myself to do it. The Tokina has great build quality and the Nikon is plastic (like my 85 1.8 and 24-85VR). And, I've convinced myself I don't need VR because I only shoot macro with it. IMO, it can hold its own with any 100/105 macro.
Click to expand...

Okay thanks! I am planning on shooting mainly macro & also doing some portrait work as well.
 
Top