40mm Nikon f/2.8 or 90mm Tamron f/2.8?

For all you Photography experts out there, photographing our tanks, which would be a better option? I'm using a Nikon D3100 body.

Nikon 40mm f/2.8 Macro
Nikon AF s DX 40mm F 2 8g Factory Renewed Macro Lens 018208022007 | eBay

or

Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro
S2596 Tamron SP AF 90mm F 2 8 Di Macro 1 1 Lens for Nikon UV 5Year Warranty New 4960371004440 | eBay

 

The shorter the focal length of a macro the closer you need to be to the subject. Get the Tamron.

 

get the tamron. you'll need the longer working distance. The camera and lens would need to be in the tank or the coral would have to be right up against the glass to get the full reproduction ratio.

 

Do you ever want to be able to take full tank shots? What other lenses do you currently own?

 

Sigma makes a very nice 105mm macro.I know a lot of people who swear buy it. They seem to think the sigma line is better quality that the others like Quantarray and Tamron. I have no idea just relaying what othersa have told me.

 

I have a Nikon 18-55mm & 55-200mm. I'm looking for something for macro shots.

 

Normally macro lenses are very close in IQ but I agree with what Greg said. You should get a wee bit more distance from your subject the longer the focal length with true macro lenses. You could also use extension tubes with your 55-200.

 

I have used the 40mm Nikkor lens multiple times. I like it, but Id go with something with a longer focal length as John said. I have also heard similar things about the Sigma macro lenses. Ive never used one though.

 

I can't speak to the different brands as I've only owned Canon lenses. It's not the 40mm you need with your current collection and plans, but that is indeed a sexy fixed focal length.

 

I owned Tamaron a while back and it was alright. I would stick with the Nikon lens.