Sigma 105 mm MACRO on canon... Is there LOVE out there?

captures.in.time

captures.in.time

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,764
Edit My Images
Yes
As title... Looking to start in t world of macro. Not wanting to spend a fortue so this seems a good option. Looks like a few good copies on ebay for around £200.

Opinions on this lens please? Or suggest alternatives!
 
I've got that lens and it's really nice with my 30D. I'd recommend it :) I don't really have any photos uploaded to show, but my copy is pin sharp and is great.

However, the AF is slow, the body feels cheap and it CAN be damaged easily if you're not careful. Still, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one at £200.
 
Last edited:
Canon 450D and the Sigma 105mm
4428205322_615e84f37f.jpg


As already has been said great lens
 
Thanks guys... one question... Is it ok on a full frame camera as I know some of the newer canon lenses are no use due to the fitting being designed for crop sensor cameras and there is an issue with the mirror
 
Sigma DG lenses are designed for full frame and this is a DG lens so it's ok.
 
Take a look at the Tamron 90mm Di Macro it always does very well in reviews due to great IQ. Its a good price and build is also ok too. It can also double up as a nice head shoot lens.

I have one and love it.
 
Siggy 105mm was my first macro - great lens for the money but if you can stretch to a Canon 100mm f2.8 USM macro (£280 -£300 on TP) the extras worth it, you get a longer working distance (distance from the end of the lens to subject), Internal focus, faster focus (not much difference for macro as you'll shoot MF, but makes the lens a whole lot better when shooting normal stuff), and it reproduces colour / contrast better than the siggy.

To get the best out of any macro lens you're going to need a well diffused flash also - so don't forget to include that in your budget also
 
^ when you say a well diffused flash what do you mean exactly??? If it's like a ring flash then im well goosed as I certainly cant afford one just now... I was looking at buying a jessops 360AFD as you can pick them up for almost nothing on ebay... Also macro is only something I want to dabble with at this stage and dont think i'd use my macro lens as a normal shooter also... I have a 24-105mm L which i'd generally use for normal stuff!

Can I ask though how is the canon a longer working distance if the sigma is a 105mm and the canon is a 100mm... I'm guessing its something to do with the internal focussing of the canon?
 
oh and can I ask... why do you all seem to shoot manual focus when shooting macro?

It's just my eyes are poor... I wear glasses and I tend to put a lot of trust in my auto focus! It would not be so bad I guess if my camera had live view but it doesn't! I guess I'll be fine as it's not like time is an issue when shooting macro really... and i'll be a slow manual focuser I think! I already use the canon specialist eyepiece for spec wearers which I must admit is a fantastic £15 well spent!
 
I should say my wife also has a 450d... which I could borrow... must check if that has live view!
 
Have you tried extension tubes as a very cheap intro?
 
Are they not a bit of a nightmare though and have a really limited DOF...??? Mind you if im not using autofocus would they work fine with my 24-105mm?
 
markelliot said:
^ when you say a well diffused flash what do you mean exactly??? If it's like a ring flash then im well goosed as I certainly cant afford one just now... I was looking at buying a jessops 360AFD as you can pick them up for almost nothing on ebay... Also macro is only something I want to dabble with at this stage and don't think I'd use my macro lens as a normal shooter also... I have a 24-105mm L which I'd generally use for normal stuff!

Can I ask though how is the canon a longer working distance if the sigma is a 105mm and the canon is a 100mm... I'm guessing its something to do with the internal focusing of the canon?
Click to expand...

You may use it when you get it , its a faster lens at f2.8 which can be good for low light and subject isolation.

The working distance for the sigma is 122mm and the Canon is 150mm , I thinks its something to do with the lens design - not just IF as the Canon 100mm l has a working distance of 146mm. I believe the focal length of a macro lens actually changes as you move towards 1:1 magnification which is possible why you have the difference.


markelliot said:
oh and can I ask... why do you all seem to shoot manual focus when shooting macro?

It's just my eyes are poor... I wear glasses and I tend to put a lot of trust in my auto focus! It would not be so bad I guess if my camera had live view but it doesn't! I guess I'll be fine as it's not like time is an issue when shooting macro really... and I'll be a slow manual focuser I think! I already use the canon specialist eyepiece for spec wearers which I must admit is a fantastic £15 well spent!
Click to expand...

The DOF is tiny at 1:1 and its very difficult to get the camera to auto focus accurately - also magnification is changed as you alter the focus' 1:1 is only achieved at minimum focusing distance. Its easier to set your magnification then gently rock the camera backwards & forwards a few mm to get the focus band on the part of the shot you want in focus. The DOF at 1:1 @ f16 is 2mm
 
Last edited:
Am thinking of selling my Sigma 105 Macro to help fund the Canon IS one...
 
I had the sigma 105 it was very sharp but the focusing was slow and sometimes would not work(with the macro ring flash fitted it wouldn't AF at all).I saw a canon 100mm macro in Ffordes for less than £250 a few weeks ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top