The light was definitely in my favor.

Thank you!

Praise from Caesar ;)
Thanks!

Thanks! I'm not sure how it compares to other lenses in this area but yeah, the depth of field is still very shallow even at f/11 and beyond.

Thanks @ezzy

Normally with less f (like f2.8) and a telelens. So you have distance between de background and the subject

Thanks @firepower :)

Thanks. I wanted to highlight the bokeh in this particular photo.

Thank you. You are most welcome, @greatdabu

Thank you :) Which do you prefer? And which models did you use? There are so many revisions with these 3rd-party lenses.

Thanks for the feedback @mweich :)

Thank you !! !! !!!!!!! :-B

Thanks!

The Tamron 90mm Macro is about the cheapest good one in the category. This is the older 272E model, which has the "Di" change that supposedly helps reduce reflections back to the digital sensor. It doesn't have the newer internal focus or image stabilization, but you don't really need those anyway  unless you don't mind spending double the price. You can find the previous 172E model (without the Di) for dirt cheap, and if it's Canon it will work on any AF body I believe. If Nikon you'll need a body that can drive older autofocus lenses that don't have motors.

If you're on a budget you should be shopping used. I think you can get a used Tokina 100mm f/2.8 for maybe a bit cheaper, but from my research online it seems like the Tamron is the better lens, and should be about the same or a little more. If your budget is real tight and you shoot Nikon (and your camera is compatible), there's a Tamron 172E on eBay right now for $185 shipped from Japan.

There are also older manual focus lenses out there for the Nikon system but I found they're not price competitive with the Tamron 90 really. You'll probably learn that manual and distance focusing is better with macro anyway, but the AF will come in handy for when you actually use it as a telephoto or portrait lens. :)

Thank you!