Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #18 · How accurate is www.the-digital-picture.com? |
To answer the questions, to me AF for a 1:1 macro lens is nearly irrelevant. I do (as most other macro photographers) macro focus fully in MF. The Canon lens itself is a lot better when AF capabilities are compared between those models, here the review is accurate. This review here also does not mention the much smaller aperture the Sigma lens can have. Anyway, my point is that all lens reviews of this site always end in favor for Canon.
Actually he does mention the smaller aperture the Sigma lens can have. The Sigma goes to f/45; the Canon goes to f/32. He writes, "Since DOF (Depth of Field) is very shallow at close distances, you will likely find yourself using this lens stopped down significantly. But maybe not to this lens' uniquely narrow minimum aperture of f/45 (f/32 with Nikon and Pentax mounts). Unfortunately, diffraction causes images to go soft beyond f/16 or f/22, so this extreme-minimum aperture is not helpful to me."
The Canon lenses are often more expensive and have the advantage of being built by the maker of the camera bodies instead of a third party. It's not surprising to me that they are often better, perhaps not in every detail, but in important areas like autofocus.
Yes, but in my experience you can easily use the Sigma lens up to f/32. in cases where I don't want to rely on focus stacking techniques, I always grab the Sima lens to get a bit better DoF. Canon's 100/2.8 EF macro lens on the on the other hand is great to use for closeup shots where I have a good AF. So personally I like both lenses, they just serve different purposes.
I am well aware that many other similar test sites are also oft influenced by subjective nature. This is often understandable since reviewers have a preference to a brand or certain lens classes, sometimes they might be also supported directly or indirectly by a specific camera brand by delivering directly new lenses or other camera gear to reviewers. What I like is that Photozone either directly purchases lenses from stores or relies on regular users to lend them lenses for testing. Good idea is also to be sceptic with some *.com sites where a commercial interest is included.