Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?
  
 
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either?


Sep 25, 2017 at 08:05 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


I have the EF 100/2.8 L IS Macro and YN-14EX Macro Ring flash. The YN works great, when I use it (which is not often). This is by far the best macro lens I've owned for handheld shooting. I also use it as backup to my 70-200/2.8L IS II for events, and sometimes use it with 24-70mm lens for shooting in close quarters (instead of the big zoom).


Sep 25, 2017 at 08:12 PM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either?


Please specify what sigma 105 macro and what canon 100 macro because both exist in two or three different versions, with the most important one that the latest versions have an image stabilizer.

The IS of the Canon 100L macro is supposedly more effective than the OS of the latest Sigma 105 macro. This is important if you work primarily hand-held and at relatively high magnification. Other than that they are optically both very good as a macro lens, maybe the Canon is slightly better as a general 100mm lens (for faraway subjects), both regarding AF speed and optical quality.

The non-IS versions are all optically very good and I would probably chose the Sigma in that case; there are mechanical difference which might sway the decision. I currently use the Canon 100L macro, have used the Sigma 105 non-OS and 150 non-OS previously; all good lenses with each their own minor pros and cons.


Edited on Sep 25, 2017 at 08:16 PM · View previous versions



Sep 25, 2017 at 08:15 PM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


I've never used the Sigma, but the non-L Canon is excellent; of course it doesn't have IS.


Sep 25, 2017 at 08:16 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


I should have mentioned both latest image stabilized copies of each... Iíve heard really good things about both


Sep 25, 2017 at 08:22 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either? I should have mentioned both latest image stabilized copies of each... Iíve heard really good things about both


Beyond macro capabilities, and at f/8, the widest you'd actually want to shoot macro where these lenses, their predecessors, and Tokina and Tamron contemporaries are all incredibly sharp, the main thing you gain is better hand-held macro shooting.

But here's the thing: even though the Canon 100/2.8L is the best stabilized lens here, it's still not 'good enough' for anything but handheld macro in bright daylight. So I'd recommend saving some cash and grabbing the Sigma.

[also, if it hasn't been said, don't worry too much about autofocus; the Canon is the best here too, and is great for video with Canon's DPAF-equipped cameras, but real macro will be all manual focus...]



Sep 25, 2017 at 08:53 PM
Mikehit
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


johnctharp wrote:
it's still not 'good enough' for anything but handheld macro in bright daylight.


Can you expand on that? And which lenses are better for different uses?



Sep 25, 2017 at 09:17 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Mikehit wrote:
Can you expand on that? And which lenses are better for different uses?


Basically, stopping to f/8 or smaller while focusing at macro distances, which also narrows the effective aperture, blocks so much light that even a 5-stop image stabilizer won't be enough for handheld shooting except in the brightest of conditions. As I said above, Canon's IS is the best here, but it's still mostly suited for video work rather than serious handheld macro work.

As a general lens, the 100L is great! As a macro lens, it's just another lens; if you're serious about macro, save your pennies and grab a Sigma or Tamron.



Sep 25, 2017 at 09:38 PM
danski0224
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either?


Both are nice lenses.

However, be aware that there is always the possibility of AF issues using a Sigma lens on a Canon body. Additionally, the Sigma macro lenses (105, 150, 180mm) have not been updated to the latest Global Vision series, and are not compatible with the Sigma USB dock.

Not bashing Sigma, just stating the facts.

---------------------------------------------

johnctharp wrote:
Basically, stopping to f/8 or smaller while focusing at macro distances, which also narrows the effective aperture, blocks so much light that even a 5-stop image stabilizer won't be enough for handheld shooting except in the brightest of conditions. As I said above, Canon's IS is the best here, but it's still mostly suited for video work rather than serious handheld macro work.

As a general lens, the 100L is great! As a macro lens, it's just another lens; if you're serious about macro, save your pennies and grab a Sigma or Tamron.


Where is a poo emoji when we need one?



Sep 25, 2017 at 10:16 PM
Bacalhau
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either?


Hi Sestesz4
what kind of subjects you plan to shoot? or what kind of results you want to achieve?
more important than acquire gear at great price, is acquire the right gear....
for instance, if you plan to mostly handheld your shots, and are into butterflies, dragonflies, etc, then the canon 100-400 mk2 might be a better choice ( ok, we are now more into close-up photography)
OTOH, if your subjects are static, and you want/need magnifications above 1:1 with plenty of mm of DOF (yes millimeters) then you might want to look at the MP-65 and a few other pieces of gear.

if it is just gas... well ...which way is the wind blowing lately?



Sep 25, 2017 at 10:26 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



danski0224
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Well, the OP did ask about 2 specific lenses

Another important difference between the Canon 100mm L and the Sigma 105mm is the Canon will accept an accessory tripod ring, and the Sigma has no such part available.

However, the Sigma 150mm macro does have a tripod ring, and it is currently available refurbished from Sigma USA for $829.00 in Canon mount (new is 1099.00). The 105mm macro in Canon mount is currently on sale at Sigma USA (and possibly elsewhere) for $569.00.

The Canon 100mm L is currently on sale for $799.00, but the tripod ring is an extra cost (Canon ring is $172.00, Vello is $49.95).

It is bigger and weighs more (and these could be issues), but I think that the Sigma 150mm is the better buy compared to the Canon 100mm.

Hard to beat the cost on the Sigma 105, but no tripod ring.

Edit to add: Do be sure to check the weight differences between the Canon 100mm L, Sigma 105mm and Sigma 150mm as the 150mm weighs noticeably more than the other two.

Edited on Sep 26, 2017 at 02:20 AM · View previous versions



Sep 25, 2017 at 11:58 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Already own the 100-400mm it does great on butterflies and dragonflies but looking for true macro. The sigma 150mm macro is the one that is probably the best value.


Sep 26, 2017 at 01:06 AM
Daniel Smith
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


As you get newer bodies the Canon will still work. The Sigma is a "maybe" and you don't know til it happens and you are waiting for them to come out with new software or something so it will work.


Sep 26, 2017 at 04:34 AM
Ferrophot
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Then how come the Sigma 70-200 2.8 I bought in 2001 still works perfectly on all my Canon bodies? And is the only lens I have that needs no AFMA?


Sep 26, 2017 at 07:26 AM
Paul Mo
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


For those with the 150 Sigma, how is the autofocus compared to the 70 DG EX? Is it a different beast/new generation altogether?


Sep 26, 2017 at 09:15 AM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


johnctharp wrote:
Basically, stopping to f/8 or smaller while focusing at macro distances, which also narrows the effective aperture, blocks so much light that even a 5-stop image stabilizer won't be enough for handheld shooting except in the brightest of conditions. As I said above, Canon's IS is the best here, but it's still mostly suited for video work rather than serious handheld macro work.

As a general lens, the 100L is great! As a macro lens, it's just another lens; if you're serious about macro, save your pennies and grab a Sigma or Tamron.


The IS gain is limited when approaching 1:1 macro, only about 2 stops at best. However, when working with subjects like butterflies and dragonflies where a tripod is very limiting, even 2 stops can make a large difference for 'getting the shot' and I use it in less then great light too (just accept that not every image will be sharp ...). For me the IS was reason enough to sell my Sigma 150mm macro non-OS and use the Canon 100L instead (plus the 4/300IS for subjects where larger distance is required). Sometimes I regret the decision though because the Sigma 150 macro is sharper than the Canon 100L for macro work - but in less than great light you often need a tripod ...


---------------------------------------------

sestesz4 wrote:
Already own the 100-400mm it does great on butterflies and dragonflies but looking for true macro. The sigma 150mm macro is the one that is probably the best value.


My experience is that the 100-400mm II isn't great at all for butterflies and dragonflies when you get near MFD. Almost any Canon tele prime will give better image quality up close (0.2-0.3x magnification, sometimes this requires an extension ring) and with less backfocus issues. And of course all macro lenses are significantly better too for real macro. But the 100-400II is a convenient do-it-all nature/wildlife lens that does well when you stay below 0.15x or so or always stop down to f/11 ...

The Sigma 150 OS seems to be a great lens, just make sure that you have no problem with the weight; it is too heavy for my taste. My experience is that when carrying such heavy lenses for a longer time, it severely impacts your handholding capability (stability).



Sep 26, 2017 at 09:45 AM
Spikey131
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Basically I can get the sigma 105 macro and sigma ring lite or the canon 100 macro and the yongnuo ringlite same price any thoughts? Anyone have either?


I use the YN-14EX with the non-IS Canon 100 macro.

Works great and that setup is a bargain.

For the macro work I do, IS would not make any difference.

I am either on a tripod or using the flash.



Sep 26, 2017 at 01:17 PM
retrofocus
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


I have both lenses and the Sigma ringflash. Both have their pros and cons, and depending on situations you might prefer one over the other.

Sigma 105/2.8:
+ Can go to a really small aperture of f/32 and is still sharp!
+ Lighter, more compact lens built
+ Outer lens is sitting back within the lens body which avoids flares, no lens hood needed IMO
- AF performance is slow
- Cumbersome AF/MF push/pull ring which easily changes its position and can potentially lead to damage of the AF (maybe a newer lens version got rid of this design - I have the older lens design)

Canon 100/2.8 (non IS)
+ Excellent with AF even in macro mode
- Quite heavy and longer in lens size than the Sigma lens
- Bokeh is worse than the Sigma lens for some reason
- Only goes down to f/22

The Sigma ringflash works excellent with both lenses, no difference observed here. My choice from experience would be the Sigma lens if AF for regular tele lens range is not required (for macro I always use manual focus).

Edited on Sep 26, 2017 at 01:36 PM · View previous versions



Sep 26, 2017 at 01:29 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Thank you technic for your input! I have found the 100-400 to do a decent job (great may have been to strong a word) on butterflies and dragonflies. Overall Iíve been pleased with it. Iím leaning more towards the sigma 150 macro os I will be using it on a tripod so weight will not be a factor and I think it will give me the length for the more skittish insects. Thank you again!


Sep 26, 2017 at 01:29 PM
retrofocus
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Thank you technic for your input! I have found the 100-400 to do a decent job (great may have been to strong a word) on butterflies and dragonflies. Overall Iíve been pleased with it. Iím leaning more towards the sigma 150 macro os I will be using it on a tripod so weight will not be a factor and I think it will give me the length for the more skittish insects. Thank you again!


I have also used the Sigma 150 lens, and it is a fantastic one, too but certainly more useful for longer distances needed to the subject. Much more heavy than the Sigma 105 lens and less suitable as carry-on macro lens for general purpose situations. But it blurs out the background nicely. You will take the Sigma 150 lens for planned close-up/macro shooting trips and especially as you pointed out for dragonflies/butterfly shooting for example.



Sep 26, 2017 at 01:35 PM
1
       2       3       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password