Tamron 90mm or Sigma 70mm

[Kerrie]

Hi All,

Once again seeking advice from those in the know. Thanks in advance.

This year I will be taking portraits ( family/new baby) , photographing events ( family functions..baby shower,engagement party etc) and I was looking into portrait and general lenses.

I also like macro and was wanting to try that too this year.

I was going to buy a tamron macro because I know they are popular and well reviewed, and use it as a portrait lens too....until I read 70mm is better length for portraits. I plan to get a 50mm 1.4 for really general stuff, and now I think I should get the sigma instead as it might be better for my needs....Both macro and portrait.

Am I on track there or........

Just want a multi use prime really...which one?

[Kym]

Don't have either, but I'd buy the Tammy 90

[Cage]

I have the Sigma 105mm macro and it rates very highly with Pentax users, as does the Tamron 90mm.

Also don't overlook the Pentax 100mm f2.8 macro.

They are all very capable at Macro and also as short telephoto and portrait lens.

Look at this link and bookmark it. http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/ and click 'Lenses'.


It has a wealth of information on all things Pentax, including lens reviews, and I can assure you the reviewers mark hard.

[Kerrie]

My main concern is that the 90mm may be too long for body shots? My daughter is expecting, so want a few tummy pics, couple pics etc.....

Anyone got a sigma 70 ?

[Kym]

With Prime's you zoom with your feet. :th3:
If you have an existing zoom in that, try both lengths first. (maybe borrow a zoom in that range?)

[peterb666]

I have the Tamron 60mm f/2 macro which is a great lenght for portrats and it does OK in that role. The 90mm Tamron does tend to be a little long on some occassions but it a more robust lens. Both are good macro lenses.

[Kerrie]

Thanks Peter. sounds like I am on the he track.

I tested lengths using my dodgy 70-200 and my kit 18-55.

I'm 5'2" on a good day and the 70 seems far enough away for me whilst focusing with my feet. To frame a person with the 70mm I am 4 meters+ away. Thats enough for me. I think I might now reconsider the 50 and go the 35 instead....but that'll be the next dilema. 35mm or 35 macro...even 30 felt nice. But I do want a fast one....and 50 wins due to 1.7 vs 2.8...low light night shots etc.

For now Sigma 70 is feeling right, even for macro, as I am more likely to use it for whats deemed close ups anyway of flowers n stuff. And will look into Tamrons 60 to compare.

thanks again

[kyteflyer]

Kerrie, the Tamron 60mm is not available in K-mount for reasons only known to Tamron. They seem to be producing less and less for Pentax as time goes on. I really wanted that one, but it was not to be. I currently have the 90mm and the Pentax 100mm in my wishlist at B&H, but will only get one of them, sooner or later. Probably the 100mm for the WR. I also have the 35mm macro which is great, because it also works well as a normal lens.

[Kerrie]

Thanks kyteflyer

Just got a fa 35mm f2 secondhand for $349, so gonna try it.

Not a lot have the sigma huh