Tokina 100mm Macro vs Sigma 70mm Macro Art

Greetings all. I'm returning to Dyxum after being out of the hobby for over 10 years. Wow have things changed. Full frame available in my budget! When I left the hobby that was a dream for recreational shooters on a budget I have an A7 II on the way and am looking for a macro lens. I will mainly be shooting salt water corals in my aquariums. I'm looking at the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 DG Macro Art Lens and also the Tokina FiRIN 100mm f/2.8 FE Macro Lens as they are in my budget. I'm afraid 50mm may not give me enough reach for my purpose. The sigma gets great ratings and can be found at very good used prices. I can not find much info on the Tokina except reviews on vendor sites which I tend to take with a grain of salt at times. Do any of you have any experience with the Tokina? I think the extra reach may come in handy but I do not want to sacrifice image quality. I'm also open to other suggestions but would like to stay at $600ish price range. TIA

nandbytes wrote: If you can find an used Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art Lens in your budget then I'd suggest that. Can't get any better than that tbh. Make sure you get the "DN" version i.e. for mirrorless and e-mount and not the older DSLR verion that goes on a-mount. Voigtlander 110mm f/2.5 macro used may also fit in your budget but could be hard to come by. Its manual focus only my the APO-lanthar macro optics is legendary. And if you don't mind MF there is also cheaper options from laowa that goes upto 2X macro Laowa 90mm f/2.8 and the laowa 85mm f5.6 if you want a smaller option.

I found a LN one for $600 delivered. I do want AF as I'll be using for portraits and other things as well as macro. Tamron 90mm macro was my favorite when I was shooting with a 5D body and later an A7(Yes I'm an old guy lol) but it looks like they do not have an offering for full frame. I've had good luck with sigma lenses in the past including the 180mm macro which I loved so maybe Ill go that route. Thanks for the suggestion

addy landzaat wrote: The Tokina 100mm Macro page gives three good reviews. It is the E-mount version of their DSLR/DSLT macro lens. Capable but not as good as newer lenses like the Sigma. Here is a good review of the Sigma DG DN 105/2.8 Macro. I think you cannot go wrong with that one.

Thank you. I think I will go with the sigma 105. Two things I've learned about this hobby is don't cheap out on glass and buy the best you can afford and only cry once.

Auto-focus is often pretty bad with macro work -- not focusing on exactly what you want to focus on. That's been my experience. As a result, I only use my old Minolta, Vivitar (Kino) and Tomioka macro lenses on my auto-focus Minolta & Sony (film and digital) cameras.

Since you mention "budget", there are lots of great manual-focus macro lenses from 90mm to 180mm to choose from. I use a Vivitar Series 1 (Kino) 105mm f2.5 Macro (no need for an extension tube), as well as a Minolta Rokkor-X 100mm f4 Bellows lens.

Edited by XKAES - 31 January 2023 at 12:32

I went with the Sigma. Everything is on the truck for delivery today I'm also going to add a 70-300g. The kit comes with a 28-70 lens so I should have good enough coverage my purposes which are recreational shooting.

nandbytes wrote: David_S wrote: I went with the Sigma. Everything is on the truck for delivery today I'm also going to add a 70-300g. The kit comes with a 28-70 lens so I should have good enough coverage my purposes which are recreational shooting. Think you will be better off with tamron 70-300mm f4.5-6.3 (once again make sure you get the e-mount version). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_220CeHFDU

Thanks for the heads up. Mint used Sony $700 or new Tamron for $500 decisions decisions. I had an old Tamron zoom I think 150-500 years ago and the zoom creep was terrible to the point of being annoying as it would fully extend when I was walking around. Maybe the 70-300 won't be as bad because it smaller and lighter? If it had a zoom lock it would be a no brainer.

nandbytes wrote: SNIP There is also a Sigma 100-400mm that might fit within your budget and give you that bit of extra reach at the long end.

Thank you very much. Great information. I will look into the sigma 100-400 as well. I tend to use the longer end of telezooms when I'm out in the woods so it may be worth it for the extra reach as well as some functions it provides that the Tamron doesn't.