Macro/portrait lenses

I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for money?

Aaron Blacksmith wrote:

I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for
money?


Consider also the Nikon 105. Then consider it and the Tamron 90 f/2.8
(and not necessarilly the Di model).

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Aaron Blacksmith wrote:

I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for money?


The only one of these that is suitable for portraiture is the Tamron
90mm f/2.8.

All the others have a poor rendering of the out of focus areas of the
shot (harsh bokeh) which means that they are basically nowhere near
ideal for portraits. However, they are all capable of delivering
sharp macro images.

The Tamron is the only dual purpose lens, equally suited to both macro
work and portraiture.

Tony Polson wrote:

Aaron Blacksmith wrote:


I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for money?



The only one of these that is suitable for portraiture is the Tamron
90mm f/2.8.

All the others have a poor rendering of the out of focus areas of the
shot (harsh bokeh) which means that they are basically nowhere near
ideal for portraits. However, they are all capable of delivering
sharp macro images.

The Tamron is the only dual purpose lens, equally suited to both macro
work and portraiture.



The Sigma 105 has soft and smooth boket and makes a very nice portrait
lens. Harsh boket is either a myth, or if not then certainly does not
apply to the EX DG version of the lens.
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/shell.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/ninabw.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/down.jpg
Go to http://www.fredmiranda.com and read some user reviews.

Tamron 90mm Macro. I used one of the originals for film about 20 years agon
and now use one on my digital Canon..

Greg
"Aaron Blacksmith" wrote in message
...
I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for
money?

frederick wrote:

The Sigma 105 has soft and smooth boket and makes a very nice portrait
lens. Harsh boket is either a myth, or if not then certainly does not
apply to the EX DG version of the lens.


I have tested several examples of the Sigma 105mm EX DG, and all had
harsh bokeh.

http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/shell.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/ninabw.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/down.jpg

Don't make me laugh! Why on earth did you choose a portrait with a
blank background? To hide the bokeh, of course!

The rendering of the child's face is harsh, showing the typical
results of an over-corrected macro lens that is basically unsuitable
for portraiture. Use this Sigma lens on a subject over 25 years old
and you will get complaints from the subject, because every line,
wrinkle and blemish will not only be visible, but cruelly emphasised
by the edge effects that are a result of over-correction. You cannot
remove them by using soft focus filters either. This is simply not a
good portrait lens, whichever way you look at it.

While the Sigma is a very unforgiving portrait lens, it is a very good
macro lens, as the macro shots you linked to clearly show.

Go to http://www.fredmiranda.com and read some user reviews.

User reviews by ignorant snapshooters are much the same wherever I
read them. As with other similar "user review" sites, that site is a
repository of reviews by people who wouldn't know a portrait lens if
it hit them on the head. I wonder how many of the reviewers have even
handled the equipment they "review", let alone used it.

Tony Polson wrote:
frederick wrote:

The Sigma 105 has soft and smooth boket and makes a very nice portrait
lens. Harsh boket is either a myth, or if not then certainly does not
apply to the EX DG version of the lens.



I have tested several examples of the Sigma 105mm EX DG, and all had
harsh bokeh.


http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/shell.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/ninabw.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/down.jpg


Don't make me laugh! Why on earth did you choose a portrait with a
blank background? To hide the bokeh, of course!

The rendering of the child's face is harsh, showing the typical
results of an over-corrected macro lens that is basically unsuitable
for portraiture. Use this Sigma lens on a subject over 25 years old
and you will get complaints from the subject, because every line,
wrinkle and blemish will not only be visible, but cruelly emphasised
by the edge effects that are a result of over-correction. You cannot
remove them by using soft focus filters either. This is simply not a
good portrait lens, whichever way you look at it.

While the Sigma is a very unforgiving portrait lens, it is a very good
macro lens, as the macro shots you linked to clearly show.


Go to http://www.fredmiranda.com and read some user reviews.


User reviews by ignorant snapshooters are much the same wherever I
read them. As with other similar "user review" sites, that site is a
repository of reviews by people who wouldn't know a portrait lens if
it hit them on the head. I wonder how many of the reviewers have even
handled the equipment they "review", let alone used it.


I knew that you'd fall for that - sorry that wasn't fair.
The portrait wasn't taken with a macro lens.
(the other shots were)
It was taken with an 85mm AI-s Nikkor at f4.
Obviously not a very good portrait lens - as you have pointed out the
faults so accurately.

frederick wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:

frederick wrote:

The Sigma 105 has soft and smooth boket and makes a very nice
portrait lens. Harsh boket is either a myth, or if not then
certainly does not apply to the EX DG version of the lens.




I have tested several examples of the Sigma 105mm EX DG, and all had
harsh bokeh.

http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/shell.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/ninabw.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/angels2000photos/down.jpg



Don't make me laugh! Why on earth did you choose a portrait with a
blank background? To hide the bokeh, of course!

The rendering of the child's face is harsh, showing the typical
results of an over-corrected macro lens that is basically unsuitable
for portraiture. Use this Sigma lens on a subject over 25 years old
and you will get complaints from the subject, because every line,
wrinkle and blemish will not only be visible, but cruelly emphasised
by the edge effects that are a result of over-correction. You cannot
remove them by using soft focus filters either. This is simply not a
good portrait lens, whichever way you look at it.

While the Sigma is a very unforgiving portrait lens, it is a very good
macro lens, as the macro shots you linked to clearly show.

Go to http://www.fredmiranda.com and read some user reviews.



User reviews by ignorant snapshooters are much the same wherever I
read them. As with other similar "user review" sites, that site is a
repository of reviews by people who wouldn't know a portrait lens if
it hit them on the head. I wonder how many of the reviewers have even
handled the equipment they "review", let alone used it.


I knew that you'd fall for that - sorry that wasn't fair.
The portrait wasn't taken with a macro lens.
(the other shots were)
It was taken with an 85mm AI-s Nikkor at f4.
Obviously not a very good portrait lens - as you have pointed out the
faults so accurately.

Use of a DUTO filter softens such lenses and turns them into halfway
decent portrait lenses. Some would say superiour portrait lenses. Unlike
diffusion or "soft Focus" filters, Duto's are sharp at the centre or
focus point.

Douglas

"Aaron Blacksmith" wrote in message
...
I will buy a portrait/macro lens for my D70s, and am considering one of
these:

Sigma 105/2.8 DG
Sigma EX 50/2,8 DG Macro
Tamron SP 90/2,8 AF Macro Di
Nikon AF Micro 60/2,8D
Tokina AT-X M100/2,8 Pro D


How would you think that they compare - what gives the best value for
money?

I use the tamron 90mm as well.....excellent lens, does a great job with both

Tony Polson wrote:

read them. As with other similar "user review" sites, that site is a
repository of reviews by people who wouldn't know a portrait lens if
it hit them on the head. I wonder how many of the reviewers have even
handled the equipment they "review", let alone used it.


It's odd that you spout a lot about a variety of lenses, yet you never
post anything original about anything; you never post your own images to
illustrate anything.

Very strange.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.