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?
  
 
technic
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · 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!


If you use tripod and don't care about the weight I would definitely chose the Sigma 150mm, for dragonflies and butterflies 150mm is simply better focal length than 100mm. And as a bonus you get better optical quality with the Sigma 150 compared to the Canon 100L macro (but the Canon may be slightly better for infinity subjects).

Personally I would prefer the old non-OS 150mm macro when working on tripod, as it is much lighter than the new OS version but I guess these are now only available on the used market so warranty can be an issue. If I had to chose just one lens for butterflies/dragonflies it would be a 150 or 180mm macro; but in practice it is more convenient for me to use a combo of 300-400mm plus the 100L macro.



Sep 26, 2017 at 02:44 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Maybe one more addition in regard to the Sigma EM-140 ringflash. I found it very suitable for close-up lighting and macro up to 1:1. But for higher magnifications - which can be achieved for example with the MPE-65 lens - the ringflash doesn't work anymore since the distance between lens and subject is so small that the ringflash frame either gets in the way or simply doesn't shine on the subject. I always used my two speedlite flashes in master/slave mode instead, sometimes handholding one of them in the short distance between lens and subject. If you intend to do this kind of high magnification macro shooting more often, the Canon Twin Lite might be a better choice than the ringflash.


Sep 26, 2017 at 03:10 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Thank you retrofocus fir your valuable insight! Since I will be spending the extra money on the sigma 150 I will have to make do with my speedlites until I can save up for a proper ringlite. My macroish work has been with my canon 100-400 ii and 70-200 ii with and without my canon 25mm extension tube with varying results. Have you ever used an extension tube with your macro lens and do you think my canon extension tube will work with the sigma lens or should I go ahead and invest in some kenko extension tubes? Thank you again!


Sep 26, 2017 at 03:55 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Thank you retrofocus fir your valuable insight! Since I will be spending the extra money on the sigma 150 I will have to make do with my speedlites until I can save up for a proper ringlite. My macroish work has been with my canon 100-400 ii and 70-200 ii with and without my canon 25mm extension tube with varying results. Have you ever used an extension tube with your macro lens and do you think my canon extension tube will work with the sigma lens or should I go ahead and invest in some kenko extension tubes? Thank you
...Show more

Both questions I can answer with yes. I used 1.4 teleconverter and 12/25 mm Kenko tubes both on my 100-400 and 70-200/4 IS lenses to do close-up shots of dragonflies and butterflies. In this kind of shooting with tele lenses, I never used the ringflash but regular speedlite flash with off-camera cord instead. I don't own Canon extension tubes, but they do the same as the Kenko tubes do and will work on the Sigma EF mount lenses. I also used Kenko tubes in different lengths attached to my macro lenses which increased the 1:1 magnification a bit where I just needed get closer to the 1.5:1 magnification range.



Sep 26, 2017 at 05:17 PM
danski0224
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


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


The current Sigma 150mm has a USM focus motor. I don't know offhand how many variants of the 150mm Sigma were made.

The 70mm macro does not have a USM focus motor. It is noisy and indecisive, at least on current Canon stuff. The lens cannot be focused manually while it is in autofocus mode. Long out of production and difficult to find in Canon or Sigma mount, but still regarded as one of the best macro lenses made.



Sep 26, 2017 at 08:46 PM
jeffp3456
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


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


The 150mm OS is a modern lens with very fast silent focusing and a built in focus motor, it was my favorite lens when shooting Nikon, easy to catch Dragonflies in flight. It is heavy but then again it is a 150mm F2.8 lens.
The 70mm (at least the nikon version) also big and heavy (relative to the Tamron 90mm) is slower to focus and does not have OS. I prefer the Tamron 90mm over the 70mm DG but if I had to do it again I would definitely go with the 150mm OS version.

JP



Sep 26, 2017 at 09:23 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Thank you everyone for the info! I have decided to go with the sigma 150 macro os and already order it! Iíll have to save my pennies, shake out the couch cushions and empty the change in the car cup holders to buy a ringlite at a future date! Unless anyone knows of some sort of adapter for my speedlite. Thanks again!


Sep 26, 2017 at 10:25 PM
technic
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


jeffp3456 wrote:
The 150mm OS is a modern lens with very fast silent focusing and a built in focus motor, it was my favorite lens when shooting Nikon, easy to catch Dragonflies in flight. It is heavy but then again it is a 150mm F2.8 lens.


I'm surprised how heavy it is compared to the Canon 2.8/200L, more than 50% difference ... Yes I know the Canon has no IS or macro, but it is 200mm, has very fast AF and L build quality (not exactly 'light' either). The Sigma OS weight is still acceptable for dragonflies-in-flight, but lower weight is always better when they are moving quickly :-)

Hopefully someone will build a light and compact 200-300mm with IS and macro (or at least good magnification up to 1:3 or so). For now the Nikon 4/300PF comes closest for me, waiting to see what Canon can do with updates for its 3.5/180 macro, 2.8/200L and 4/300IS lenses. Sigma 2.8/180 OS also sounds great until you see the size/weight (almost same as the 100-400II ...).



Sep 28, 2017 at 08:34 AM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Well I just received my sigma 150 macro os ( I think Iím going to really enjoy this lens)and honestly I donít find it heavy at all but I donít find the canon 100-400 ii heavy either, now they are not lite but not heavy either. To me my Sigma 500 f4 and my Sigma 150-600 sport are heavy and should always be used on a tripod. I think what might be heavy to some might not be to others. As long as you can hand hold with good technique and get a sharp clear photo all is good.


Sep 28, 2017 at 02:03 PM
technic
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
Well I just received my sigma 150 macro os ( I think Iím going to really enjoy this lens)and honestly I donít find it heavy at all but I donít find the canon 100-400 ii heavy either, now they are not lite but not heavy either. To me my Sigma 500 f4 and my Sigma 150-600 sport are heavy and should always be used on a tripod. I think what might be heavy to some might not be to others. As long as you can hand hold with good technique and get a sharp clear photo all is good.


These lenses are not so much heavy to hold, but heavy to move very quickly. More weight means that (much) more force is required for quick moves, like quickly targeting a new subject that pops up or tracking a fast and erratic moving subject. Even more so when much of the weight is in front instead of close to the camera body (more momentum).

I have no problem handholding the 100-400II and getting a sharp shot at 1/30s (thanks to the IS ...) but IMHO it is not the best choice for dragonflies-in-flight; only works when they are hovering, gliding or flying a predictable path without sudden acceleration (many dragonflies change position and direction/speed every second or so), or if they are relatively far away (and fill just a fraction of the frame). For static subjects like seated dragonflies more weight can sometimes be beneficial as it helps stabilizing the camera ...



Sep 28, 2017 at 02:48 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


Sorry Technic I misunderstood and I completely agree with you! Thanks again for your knowledge on the sigma. Iíve been out testing it and it is awesome and I should have bought one long ago! Definitely gonna have to buy a ringlite but the images so far are nice!


Sep 28, 2017 at 04:30 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


So after using the Sigma 150 macro os (7D MKII body) my overall thoughts are it is not quite as sharp as my 70-200 ii for flowers or 100-400 ii for butterflies or dragonflies but for smaller insects it is worth the money in my opinion....if you are into macro


Oct 03, 2017 at 11:47 PM
sestesz4
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


A few photos with the Sigma 150mm os and 7D MKII body

















Oct 04, 2017 at 01:12 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


johnctharp wrote:
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
...Show more

I disagree. For one thing, sometimes you want to throw things oof while shooting macro. And I've shot hh a lot at wider than f/8 with a Tamron 180 and others. Might not be 100% ideal, but it can work imo.

Also even iso 800 helps, and the newer bodies can probably go higher than that.

Even a couple stops from the IS could have you getting nice stuff hh.



Oct 04, 2017 at 01:34 AM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


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


Never used the 70 and only have the older non stabilized Sigma 150 2.8 APO.

AF was ok on a 7D, at least in close which was the last Canon camera I used it on.

On a Sony FF E mount camera it plays up for AF so I only use it MF really.

On M43 and a Kipon adapter, AF is very good- fast and accurate for AFS (AFC with my camera and adapter is close to zero).

I would think it should be fine on a recent Canon DSLR, at least for in close work.



Oct 04, 2017 at 04:02 AM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


AmbientMike wrote:
Even a couple stops from the IS could have you getting nice stuff hh.


It's not that it doesn't help at all, but that the delta between where it helps and where you'll need to use flash anyway is very small, so the presence and efficiency of optical stabilization should be weighted accordingly.

[i.e., it's not worth spending more for the 100L over a stabilized Sigma/Tamron if you're only going to use it at 1:1 macro distances, unless you know that you're going to be shooting regularly at that limit]



Oct 04, 2017 at 04:41 AM
charlyw
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


My vote goes to the Canon - for the simple reason that the Canon has an optional tripod ring - which in macro photography on a tripod (yes 100% of my bug and flower shots are done from a tripod) is irreplaceable!


Oct 04, 2017 at 06:26 AM
technic
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


sestesz4 wrote:
So after using the Sigma 150 macro os (7D MKII body) my overall thoughts are it is not quite as sharp as my 70-200 ii for flowers or 100-400 ii for butterflies or dragonflies but for smaller insects it is worth the money in my opinion....if you are into macro


That's really surprising to me, I would expect the Sigma 150 to be significantly better for flowers and butterflies/dragonflies as well, not just near 1:1. Did you check if maybe AF needs adjustment (or try if focusing using Liveview gives sharper results?).



Oct 04, 2017 at 12:23 PM
WestFalcon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


I usually consider future compatibility and resale value in purchases. The Canon wins here every time. The picture quality between the two brands is probably identical and more dependent on camera shake and depth of field (f-stop). I try to do macro on a tripod and remote release whenever possible. Tiny f/stops may affect your resolution due to diffraction. Sometimes you need to use a special program to extend the depth of field with "photo stacking". Canon is more expensive in most cases but a better long term investment in my opinion. Good luck.


Oct 04, 2017 at 02:24 PM
retrofocus
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Canon 100mm macro or sigma 105mm macro?


WestFalcon wrote:
I usually consider future compatibility and resale value in purchases. The Canon wins here every time. The picture quality between the two brands is probably identical and more dependent on camera shake and depth of field (f-stop). I try to do macro on a tripod and remote release whenever possible. Tiny f/stops may affect your resolution due to diffraction. Sometimes you need to use a special program to extend the depth of field with "photo stacking". Canon is more expensive in most cases but a better long term investment in my opinion. Good luck.


Small f-stops can be very useful for macro photography - I found that macro lenses are much less affected by diffraction issues at small f-numbers as regular lenses. Focus stacking works well if the subject is static and doesn't move - but outside in nature, I rarely find this to occur. Most often it has to be one shot to capture the critical moment, and sometimes wide DoF is needed, too. I find the lack of sufficient DoF very present in an otherwise excellent macro lens - the MP-E 65. It only goes down to f/16. Maybe not such big issue with this lens since it is purposely made for larger magnifications where wider DoF is hard to get anyway. Nevertheless, I had a few times where I would have loved to see one or two more additional stops.

Regarding prices, yes, Sigma lenses have not such good resale value. But looking at Canon EF lens prices other than the very long tele lenses, they also dropped significantly in the past few years for known reasons (buyers market). I believe it doesn't really matter at this point if it is Sigma or Canon regarding potential resale price. I personally would look at this point for a used EF lens of either brand since then the loss at resale later is minimized.



Oct 04, 2017 at 03:06 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