Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42

Thread: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    1,392

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by XXXcat
    yea, after shooting that grasshopper... ok, still thinking abt it...
    wow nic,
    since when u start shooting hoppers???

  2. #22

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    A professional's advice: The brand name is not utmost important. What is important is your working distance and space. For the kind of work I am shooting, a 90mm, 100mm or 105mm macro lens is simply too long. Sometimes, I have to work in constrained spaces such as hotel or restaurant kitchens and bars, or small shops. Using a 90mm macro means that I have to stand quite far away from the subjects. This is simply not practical.

    For me, I prefer a 55mm or 60mm macro, which I find myself use most of the time. Just something I will like to share with all.
    Last edited by photobum; 22nd August 2006 at 09:47 PM.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    A professional's advice: The brand name is not utmost important. What is important is your working distance and space. For the kind of work I am shooting, a 90mm, 100mm or 105mm macro lens is simply too long. Sometimes, I have to work in constrained spaces such as hotel or restaurant kitchens and bars, or small shops. Using a 90mm macro means that I have to stand quite far away from the subjects. This is simply not practical.

    For me, I prefer a 55mm or 60mm macro, which I find myself use most of the time. Just something I will like to share with all.
    true, but i think TS wanted to use that lens to shoot hopper or any other live insert, 90mm will be a much better choice as compared to 55/60mm because you won't have to go too near it.

  4. #24

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Yeah, sometimes I find 90mm i cannot get close enough to some shy insects...

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    yup, its a dilemma. too far away makes you have hard to frame the insect, while too near might scared off them.

  6. #26

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    T90 very sharp and affordable, add TC if you want it bigger, it's light enuff for handheld macro. Focus is slow though accurate. I normally manual focus.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    woodlands
    Posts
    525

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by ExplorerZ
    true, but i think TS wanted to use that lens to shoot hopper or any other live insert, 90mm will be a much better choice as compared to 55/60mm because you won't have to go too near it.
    yup! i quite like to shoot insert. i realise after shooting hopper, insert is so beautiful.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    8,167

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by XXXcat
    yup! i quite like to shoot insert. i realise after shooting hopper, insert is so beautiful.
    Insect or insert?

  9. #29

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by ExplorerZ
    true, but i think TS wanted to use that lens to shoot hopper or any other live insert, 90mm will be a much better choice as compared to 55/60mm because you won't have to go too near it.
    I am not an insect shooter, so 90mm is overkill for me. As a full-time professional photographer, I don't have that kind of life or time to shoot insects.

    For many insect shooter I know or encounter, however, they would rather go for 180mm or 200mm macro instead.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    For me, I prefer a 55mm or 60mm macro, which I find myself use most of the time. Just something I will like to share with all.
    would you recommend using a reversed 50mm lens instead?

  11. #31

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by GmbH.
    would you recommend using a reversed 50mm lens instead?
    For what purpose? What are your subjects?

    If you are dead poor, then my answer is yes. A used 55mm macro is roughly about $350 now.
    Last edited by photobum; 23rd August 2006 at 01:07 AM.

  12. #32
    Senior Member dominator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Amazon Forest
    Posts
    1,662

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    A professional's advice: The brand name is not utmost important. What is important is your working distance and space. For the kind of work I am shooting, a 90mm, 100mm or 105mm macro lens is simply too long. Sometimes, I have to work in constrained spaces such as hotel or restaurant kitchens and bars, or small shops. Using a 90mm macro means that I have to stand quite far away from the subjects. This is simply not practical.

    For me, I prefer a 55mm or 60mm macro, which I find myself use most of the time. Just something I will like to share with all.
    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    I am not an insect shooter, so 90mm is overkill for me. As a full-time professional photographer, I don't have that kind of life or time to shoot insects.

    For many insect shooter I know or encounter, however, they would rather go for 180mm or 200mm macro instead.
    Hi can share why you need to shoot in kitchen and bars on macro? How come 90mm you need to stand quite far?
    Thanks!
    Cleanse your thoughts, not by the foods you eat.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by dominator
    Hi can share why you need to shoot in kitchen and bars on macro? How come 90mm you need to stand quite far?
    Thanks!
    Food and beverage close-ups shots. That's why. I usually go on location especially when our studio does not have kitchen facilities.

    Longer focal length mah. The longer the focal length, the further you'll have to shoot from your subjects. That's why I said earlier, 180mm and 200mm is ideal for insects because you do not have to stand too close otherwise you may scare them away.
    Last edited by photobum; 23rd August 2006 at 08:53 AM.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    Food and beverage close-ups shots. That's why. I usually go on location especially when our studio does not have kitchen facilities.

    Longer focal length mah. Ther longer the focal length, the further you'll have to shoot from your subjects. That's why I said earlier, 180mm and 200mm is ideal for insects because you do not have to stand too close otherwise you may scare them away.
    180mm and 200mm is of cos the best for insect shooting, but i think it is because of the budget that keeps most people from getting T90 instead

  15. #35

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by ExplorerZ
    180mm and 200mm is of cos the best for insect shooting, but i think it is because of the budget that keeps most people from getting T90 instead
    I don't think longer macro lenses are more expensive. An used Sigma 180mm macro cost around $550 last time I saw at TCW.
    Last edited by photobum; 23rd August 2006 at 08:54 AM.

  16. #36

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    For what purpose? What are your subjects?

    If you are dead poor, then my answer is yes. A used 55mm macro is roughly about $350 now.
    say for still life or food photography?
    would reverse lens be sufficient?

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    1.45N 103.83E
    Posts
    3,202

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    the Tamron is the best Macro lens. only a bit slow in the AF but for macro, I use manual most of the time.


    thumbs up for the Tamron 90 f2.8

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    I don't think longer macro lenses are more expensive. An used Sigma 180mm macro cost around $550 last time I saw at TCW.
    wow thats very low. i since people selling 2hand at 800-900.

  19. #39

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by GmbH.
    say for still life or food photography?
    would reverse lens be sufficient?
    It should be sufficient if your clients are not fussy. Still, nothing beats a real macro lens.

    In the past, I have used an extension bellow with both Nikkor 50mm and 105mm AI lenses. Really nice results but you do lose some light along the process.
    Last edited by photobum; 23rd August 2006 at 02:26 PM.

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Legion
    Posts
    7,751

    Default Re: Sigma 105mm F2.8/Tamron 90mm F2.8

    Quote Originally Posted by photobum
    For those of you who are interested to get the Tamron 90mm macro (any camera mount) or any Tamron lenses, I may be able to get them at prices much lower than Cathay Photo, MS Color or Alan Photo. They all comes with the same 3 years local warranty from Tithes Marketing.
    how much is a T90? interested to get 1 if price is good

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •