Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="T-Man" data-source="post: 467047" data-attributes="member: 22038">10 Gauge -- I echo the general consensus so far. Since you included the macro requirement, I'd definitely get the 105 first. As for the Tokina vs Nikon vs Sigma 105s, I have no idea which is best, but all the info I've read about each leads me to believe they are probably so close in performance, you wouldn't notice much, if any performance differences. Another option is the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro. Of these, I have the Sigma 105 f/2.8 Macro, but I only bought it a couple weeks ago, so I haven't had enough time with it yet to form a good opinion. So far so good. My only complaint about it to this point is it makes a funny noise when the OS is turned on. 105mm is a good focal length for portraits; you'll only need to get a little further from your subject than you would with the 85. The only real disadvantages to it vs the 85 that I know of are that it won't give you the extremely shallow DOF the 85 will and if you're taking group portraits in tight quarters (inside a small interior room, for example), it can sometimes be difficult to get enough subject distance to get everyone in the group in the frame. For most shots, most of the time, you likely won't need to go wider than f/2.8 even though it's nice to have f/1.4 or 1.8 capability for the rare shots you can benefit from the extra speed and razor thin DOF. 85mm is a better portrait length for indoors, but depending on where you're shooting 105mm will work great a high % of the time. It's only when you're constrained for space or you're shooting large group portraits when it might be too much FL.If you're really serious about portraits, I would definitely consider getting a fast 85mm in the future, though.</blockquote>

Verification