105 macro buying advice

hello all, well after looking at all the amazing macro photos on here i'm thinking of getting one, the question is which one. nikkor 105 or sigma 105. or the 85mm of both makes. I've got a d7000 with 2 kit lens,50mm 1.8 10mm fisheye, 12-24mm and 70-300 mm not the 2.8 one
Now Im starting get into potrait a little bit and seen that this is a very good choice. would this will be true on the d7000 or would the conversation factor, taking it upto some where near the 150mm mark make to much and in which case would an 85mm macro suit my uses better as it works out to 105mm i think. Of course I would use it for macro and i've seen that there is little differance in the min focus distance for both sizes with the 105 being about 10mm further away than the 85.
Ive seen a review in this months digital camera( i think )and they say the sigma is a better lens..... so dear friends... who's got what and what do you think of them...
thanks for the help in spending my hard earned money LOL.
Ed

Personal opinion if you are planing on shooting portraits indoors the 105mm on a DX might be a little long unless you have a really long room so you could back up. Take your 70-300 lens and set it on 85 and shoot a portrait in a room you might be shooting in. Now do the same thing with the lens set at 85.

The 85mm on a DX works out to close to 130mm equivalent.

You will get many different opinions here and everyone has their favorites so thy the above first so you can see for yourself the difference.

Can't help with the Nikon vs Sigma question.

hey,, also with the 7000, you can use a used 105 2.8 micro.. really nice lens. love mine. I also
use a 60mm AF macro,, nice lens, but you have to be closer, then the 105, and bugs don't like for the lens to be that close.

hi stmv, does the old 105 extend when focused? and when not used for macro does it auto focus...
Am i correct in thinking its a sharper lens?

I'm also interested in macro photography at 1:1 or better but my route is to try using a reversed lens first.
Much cheaper if I decide it's not really for me, only cost £9 and results are good.
Already tried it with a locust too and although not a well composed shot, it does show what you can do with a reversed lens.

Have a look at the battery test I posted earlier today >>HERE<<

And a locust shot with a 35mm reversed, this pic has been tweaked in NX2 but not cropped.

Are you planning to move up to FX? If yes I would put more weight on the Nikon 105mm. It is great as tele with VR makes it versatile. But for a DX it is too long for a lot of use. In this case consider the 60mm. 90mm is a good length for macro and other things, is relatively light. On FX is good as a "normal" as we'll, so good for traveling light. I have the 60, 105mm, and the 200mm. All great lenses. JD

would love to go to fx but the 7000 is such a good camera id have to say no for the moment, but i did think that it would be good for a later fx. but is the 105 a better marco than the 80.. so money permitting use the 105 for macro and get an 80 later for everything else..hey ive got an insane 10.5 fish eye i use when i dive...which isn't as often as i like so in the real world I could justify it to myself ... but think my lovely wife wont be as easy to convince LOL
Rexter John..all I can say is wow...hadnt even though about them. Ill have a look

I have the Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR and have a thread in the prime lens section.

I am happy with that macro lens and I use it with both DX or FX camera. Consider getting a stable tripod when shooting macro.

The good news is that all macro lenses are sharp. The Sigma 150mm f2.8 is also a great candidate but a little bit bigger.

Not to mention you can stack lenses via reverse ring, and then things get even more wild for roughly 10-15$.

Edb said:

hi stmv, does the old 105 extend when focused? and when not used for macro does it auto focus...
Am i correct in thinking its a sharper lens?

Click to expand...

Yes, it is a phenomenally sharp lens. Yes, it does extend when focussing close subjects, and yes, you can use it for portraiture and as a telephoto, but see my comment below. Go to my project 365 page, Piperbarb's 2013 Project 365, and check the photos I have taken with that lens, if you want get an idea.

I have that lens (from my F4 days). Wonderful lens. Using it as a regular telephoto can be a little fussy for distance shots because the focus must be spot on, but it is worth it, once you get used to it. I love that lens. It is one of my favorite lenses. It is super sharp, bright through the viewfinder, and produces absolutey beautiful images. Others here know how often I refer to it as my favorite or one of my favorite lenses.

As a macro lens, it is great. I like that you do not have to get on top of your subject to get a great photo. I have the AF 55 micro-Nikkor and don't remember the last time I used that lens. It, too, is a great lens, but I have to get too close to my subject to use it, although it is a much smaller, lighter lens.

​Hope that helps.

Edb said:

hi stmv, does the old 105 extend when focused? and when not used for macro does it auto focus...
Am i correct in thinking its a sharper lens?

Click to expand...

Yes, and no,,, I am speaking of the 105 micro AIS lens,, an super sharp old classic.. good to find used.

Deleted due to irrelevance

I don't all of those are macro lenses.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

jwstl said:

I don't think those are all macro lenses.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Click to expand...

You are right..
Just rechecked.. They are just rating of all lenses for the D4.. so makes that post totally irrelevant..
Deleting it folks

Ive decided to go for a nikon 105mm..dont think i can really go wrong. Now just got to wait for the right one..
Ill post a photo when i get one and get used to it. Thanks for all the advice.
Ed

Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk HD

i own the 105mm af-d micro nikkor and yes, it does extend when you focus at minimum distance but nowhere near as much as the tamron 90mm.
the tamron almost doubles in length! the nikon increases its length by about a quarter.
when shooting at more normal distances neither extend.
the newer vr version of the 105 nikon is said to suffer more when stopped down than the older af-d. vr is not that effective at macro distances and it is a lot bigger and heavier.
both nikons "breath" when close focusing.
the newer sigma 105 os if does not extend and equals/betters the nikon but has a similar price tag.
​another lens worth checking out is the sigma 150mm macro. (the non os version). my fave macro tool, works rather well with the sigma 1.4 tc too.

​hello all, just to update, I found a really good deal on a second hand, unused sigma 105. should have it in a could of day and then the process of learning how to use it.
One last question, if your all not to bored of me already ,.. I;ve got a manfrotto 190xprob with a 498rc2 head. Ive read that geared heads are better for marco work im guessing because they have finer adjustment. Is this something i should look at getting later of will mine be fine.
Ill put up some pics when I have got some that aren't a) of my finger b) are in focus c) of something other than the branch still bouncing as i take the shot just after the subject has moved. lol
thanks for the advice
​ed

so ended up gettign the sigma for a really good price. turned up in thursday and i went to a play today...damn macro is hard. how do you guys do anything hand held and get no shake?
Im loving the lens. I went for a walk today and took this. I think theres a bit of shake on there but for a 1st attempt ( well its the best of about 30 shots of the bee lol)
i love the smooth bokeh.. think it might end up staying on the camera for a while now
one question though.. how do you get realy close ups of insects. This lens gives 1:1 at about 31cm, then add the lens and hood you havent got a lot of room to play with, so hows it done then?
thanks for the help and advice