Macro lens choice?

mw0dbb

mw0dbb

Suspended / Banned
Messages
185
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, I am after a macro lens to play around with. I have been looking at the Sigma 105mm f2.8 OS version. Has anyone has any experience with this lens? I would prefer the canon 100mm lens but don't really want to pay more than £400.

John

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
Canon 60mm or canon 100 (non L version). Both are macro lenses and from my experience both are SHARP. The 60mm may be a little short on a full frame body but is fine on a cropped. Both can be had second hand for under £200 each.

Currently using the 100 on a 6D - the problem is not the lens but my technique. When I get it right the photos are great. Unfortunately this is not very often. :lol:
 
My daughter has the Sigma 50mm Macro lens and loves it, very well built and sharp. If I was looking for a longer Macro, I'd certainly look at the 105mm version...
 
My budget is £400 anyway. I did look at the no L version of the canon macros.

John

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
Just to throw another option at you, the Tamron 90/2.8. assorted models available. OS is of less use in macro than when the lens is used as a short telephoto. Worth having if it can be found in budget though.
 
I have looked at the Tamron aswell, I really don't know which one to go for?

John

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
I have been using the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX Macro for some years now, and have been delighted with it.

First used on a 30D, then a 7D, and now a 5D Mklll.

It always receives very good reviews.

The only reason I could think of for changing it, is to upgrade to the later OS version, but then as most of my macro imaging is done using a tripod, that the lack of OS have never really been a issue.

I should perhaps add that all my other lenses are Canon L series, and this Sigma is as sharp as any of them, and nice build quality too.

Dave
 
Last edited:
It depends on the type of Macro photography you are going to be doing. If you are aiming at live insects and bugs etc I'd suggest something over 100mm to give you a better working distance hand held so as not to scare the beasties away. If you are doing static stuff and using a tripod then you'd be safe to go under 100mm. Of course if you fancy a real challenger there is the MPE-65 (for Canon tho). It's a great wee lens but hard work.
 
My skills don't extend that far, the easier the better lol! I will be using a tripod though. It's just something I fancy having a go at.

John

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
I have just recently got the Sigma 105 f2.8 IS macro lens for my Canon 70D. This lens is as sharp as the Canon 100mm lens (not just me saying this but a review I read in a photo magazine which did a head to head) I bought the lens from WEX for £400. If I had a slight concern the IS makes a slight noise when operating apart from that you will not go wrong with this lens.

PS
I do have have a white Canon lens so I am not biased but Sigma do make some superb lenses and this is one of them.
 
andyred said:
My daughter has the Sigma 50mm Macro lens and loves it, very well built and sharp. If I was looking for a longer Macro, I'd certainly look at the 105mm version...
Click to expand...

It's a great lens but most definitely not well built. Very cheap mind, and excellent IQ. Worth getting to see if Macro is for you before settling on a better lens later
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
It's a great lens but most definitely not well built. Very cheap mind, and excellent IQ. Worth getting to see if Macro is for you before settling on a better lens later
Click to expand...

Sorry, think I'm going to have to disagree, our Sigma 50mm Macro is built well. It's solid and has a smooth mechanism with no wobble / play in the barrel movement
 
Last edited:
I have a sigma lens now which is the 10-20mm and I love it. I did however have a 70-200mm sigma and didn't have good results with it! I must admit though the build quality was very good. I am leaning more towards the Sigma unless I find a second hand canon L lens!
 
mw0dbb said:
I have looked at the Tamron aswell, I really don't know which one to go for?

John

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
Click to expand...
That's an easy one...

The sigma has internal focusing, full time manual focusing, faster AF, OS and is the little bit longer...

The 105mm OS is a prime and a macro - it's going to be great, like all of them are :)

...I'd get it.
 
I had the Tamron 90mm and it was a cracking lens.
I sold it buy the nikon 105mm but had a good look at the Sigma and it was a nice lens to use, the older version being cheaper than the £500+ Nikon.
Took some nice portraits with the Tamron too. (D90 & D7000)
 
Flipper24 said:
I had the Tamron 90mm and it was a cracking lens.
I sold it buy the nikon 105mm but had a good look at the Sigma and it was a nice lens to use, the older version being cheaper than the £500+ Nikon.
Took some nice portraits with the Tamron too. (D90 & D7000)
Click to expand...
I've also had the tamron and found it extends far too much and is slower than an old lady walking upstairs to focus.

Would happily pay the extra for internal focusing, faster AF and stabilisation (as I when i bought the nikon 105).
 
I've got the Sigma 105 OS and its a great lens very sharp and excellent build quality. The most recent macros on my flickr are taken with it . I used to have the Sigma 150mm and it is also a very good choice, its advantage as already mentioned is that you are further away so useful for live insects. maybe have a look at some of the groups dedicated to the lenses you are considering so you can see the quality of the images you can get.
 
Phil Young said:
I've also had the tamron and found it extends far too much and is slower than an old lady walking upstairs to focus.

Would happily pay the extra for internal focusing, faster AF and stabilisation (as I when i bought the nikon 105).
Click to expand...

Yes, the Tamron did extend quite a bit and compared to the Nikon focused slower but it was tack sharp and good value for the money.
 
I would like to see some images with the Sigma that havent been played with. Just an image of a house spider or that sort of thing? No cropping or processing if anyone has one?
 
I recently purchased a Cosina 100mm f3.5. It is jaw droppingly sharp. I was very lucky and picked up a Canon EF mount variant off eBay for the grand sum of £48. It has a very plasticy feel to it and the AF is pretty dire but seem as my intention was to use manual focus it didn't particularly bother me. The optics are the key thing and they are very good indeed. In summary - great optics in a cheap housing :)
 
as a cheap entry into macro theres raynox, reversing a old lens like a 28mm, or old lens on extension tubes
 
I have the Tamron 90mm as mentioned, it is Razor sharp and forget about focus speed. Wth macro manual focus I find produces the best image. Having said that auto focus is ok but when working on closeups with manual focus looking in the camera back screen and zooming in with the camera via the plus button one can get that fine adjustment
 
I went straight for the Canon 100mm f2.8L IS when I got a macro lens as I had the money to do so. If I hadn't got the budget for it I would of gone for the Canon 100mm non L or the Sigma 105mm. I tried both of the lenses and the IQ was excellent from both of them but I was then left some money in a will so I went for the L version. With the IS on it focusses fast enough on both my 5D3 and 70D to be able to use AF nearly all of the time and I have it prefocussed to a subject area for most of the other shots. I have used MF but only on a very few times as the AF speed is excellent and is supposed to be similar for the non L version.

You will need to think about lighting for most macro shots as I usually shoot between f9 and f16 to get a large enough DOF to cover the subject but that will slow down the shutter speed too much (unless you really bump the ISO and then you end up with noise) so good light is essential. You can use a speedlite, but that doesn't tend to give the best light if it's on camera, but off camera flash with a speedlite is better. Alternatively you could get a ringflash or dual flash which attach to the front of the lens and gives a nice even light. My macro shots were greatly improved with a ringflash, I got a Marumi ETTL flash for around £60 to start with but I've now got a Sigma EM140 DG twin flash and that gives a whole lot more lighting options but is a lot more expensive.
 
Thanks for the advice, I would prefer the canon but I don't have the money for it. Even second hand they are fetching good money. I did think about the non L version aswell but really wanted image stabilisation. I know it's not as effective at close range but I will use the lens for other things anyway. I could probably stretch to 500 for a canon if I could find one! But at present I am leaning more towards the Sigma.

John
 
I love my 150mm Sigma EX DG HSM Macro f2.8
Second-hand can be had for under £400 - I paid £350 for mine..
 
Finally got my sigma 105mm! I'm pretty impressed with how sharp it is so far. :)
 
A good choice John, I have one and I love it!
You'll find macro really addictive, you'll constantly be trying to think of interesting things to photograph.
 
I have found that already, is it worth getting a ring flash?
 
I would say if you're serious then yes, but don't be tempted to get one of the LED ones, I gather they're pretty poor.
What you could do for now is to go all Blue Peter and cobble together something to fit over your normal flash to direct the light where you want it.
Some people use pringles tubes but I made one out of a squeezy mayonnaise bottle, some foil tape and an ebay Stofen omni-bounce copy. :lol:
My next project is going to be a twin version. :D
 
I was told to avoid the led ones as the light can be a bit weird! I was thinking a Yongnuo YN-14EX though?
 
Oh....why did you have to do that to me??!!
I'm going to have to add one of those to my 'need' list now! :p
 
For me I'd go Canon 100mm non IS and an off camera flash. You should easily get both for under £400 if you go 2nd hand as I did. Take a look at the "sticky post" in the macro forum for some great ideas!
 
Reviews aren't exactly numerous but the ones I've found have been pretty good. I'd say for that sort of money it's got to be well worth a punt.
 
I'm very happy with it so far. I don't think sigma 's build quality is as nice though? I liked there silky feeling before... Now it just looks plastic.!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top