 |
|
|
Harry Jadwani
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Apr 21, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 62
|
|
Review Date: Dec 30, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $275.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light, easy to handle, unlike the heavier 150mm f2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
None for me....
|
|
|
A great macro lens - easier to use than the Sigma 150mm and the Canon 100mm f2.8, though the latter has a better AF USM motor.
|
|
 Dec 30, 2007
|
|
Dan Fleury
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 10, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 246
|
|
Review Date: Sep 9, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $190.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very cheap on used market, great clarity, contrast, colour, f45 on canon version, oh and sharp, sharp, sharp!
|
|
Cons:
|
sigma's odd clutch auto/manual focus switching, AF hunting (expected), screw in hood
|
|
|
I picked up a rather used version of this lens. Full of dust, but got it dirt cheap. Sent it in to Sigma for a chip upgrage (it would not work on my 30D - error 99), and it floored me when I started using it.
Amazing colour, contrast and oh so sharp! The 1:1 macro is what I wanted this lens for, but I use it for portraits all the time, with the 2.8 aperture being great for that. I have found myself using this lens for some sports photography too! Its incredibly slow to focus, but if you have any manual focus talent, you will love the images you get!
The miniscule f45 possibilities of the canon version of this lens are great for the macro folks too. ( I think the nikon one is limited to f32?)
Amazing glass for the price. If you see one, grab it quick!
|
|
|
Sep 9, 2007
|
|
Per Zangenberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 17, 2007
Location: Denmark
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $380.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP!, L-like color and constrast, cheap considering the awesome IQ, 2.8 - allthough you hardly use that for macro.
|
|
Cons:
|
Very slow focus, strange system for switching between manual and auto focus, a bit short for macro on fullframe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2007
|
|
Aaron Hogsed
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 31, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $359.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP SHARP SHARP great price
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF for portraits
|
|
|
From a Canon "L" guy who usually looks down his nose at Sigma stuff, I have to admit this is one heck of a sharp lens. I have never heard of anyone complain about it.
Makes a great portrait lens if you don't mind the slower AF which is par for macros.
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2007
|
|
retrofocus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 2445
|
|
Review Date: Apr 19, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $365.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
High optical quality macro lens. Very fast, perfect for close-up photography of insects and flowers. Even feasible for portrait photography.
|
|
Cons:
|
Autofocus seems to be a bit difficult together with a Canon Rebel XT. To change between MF and AF you need to switch the normal selection button AND moving the focus ring forward/backward. The focus ring can easily loose its position and can then damage in the worst case the AF function of the lens.
|
|
|
This is my heavily used lens for doing close-up photographies of flowers and insects. Together with the Canon Rebel XT this prime lens leads to an overall focal length of 168mm. This allows to keep a perfect distance to moving objects like butterflies. Depending on the object, I tend to use small and medium f numbers. In all cases, the picture is always sharp, coming with superb contrast and color reproduction.
Another advantage is the front lens. It lies a bit in the inner part of the lens case, so a lens hood or a filter just to protect the front lens is not really necessary.
For close-up photography I normally focus manually anyway. But in some cases I experienced problems with the autofocus of this lens. It tends to easily jump even with the right position on the focus limiter. The AF is pretty noisy compared to the newer USM driven lenses.
It is always necessary to switch the focus ring forward/backward depending on the MF or AF switch position. This is a bit inconvenient first, but you will get used to it after a short time.
Overall, I can recommend this lens because of its perfect optical properties. The build quality is very good, too. If you don't need AF for your close-up photography a lot, then this lens is definetely right for you!
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2007
|
|
jim ligori
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 20, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 41
|
|
Review Date: Feb 10, 2007
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Sorry, can't think of any.
|
|
Cons:
|
Error 99 about 50% of the time, manual/auto focus ring takes some getting use to. Center of image tends to be sharp, but edges aren't.
|
|
|
I am chalking this one up to a bad copy of this lens. Although I have gotten some good images from this lens, I can't believe how much it errors, especially at macro focal lengths. I have owned it for a month, and its going back today. I marked that I wouldn't recommend this product to others, but if you had a good sharp copy, that didn't error out its probably worth it.
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2007
|
|
_Mike_D
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 27, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Jan 27, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $375.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality, very sharp, inexpensive
|
|
Cons:
|
105mm a little too tele for everyday use
|
|
Great lens at a great price. Before I bought this lens I owned nothing but zooms. At first, I was hesitant to buy it, but after looking at my first few shots I was very impressed with how much clearer shots from this lens looked compared to shots with my zoom. So much so that I ended up trying to use this lens for just about everything I could.
Although this lens is great optically, I prefer a slightly wider focal length for day to day shots. And I have since sold this lens and bought a Tamron 90mm for that reason alone. Aside from that I can't find fault with this lens, especially at this price.
I highly recommend this lens to anyone looking for a good lens.
Pictures I have taken with this lens.
http://www.one-blind-eye.com/index.php?x=browse&category=22
|
|
|
Jan 27, 2007
|
|
tanglefoot47
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14736
|
|
Review Date: Dec 5, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $378.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great value for the money
|
|
Cons:
|
No HSM, extends
|
|
|
Man what a lens this baby is nothing but sharp and a real joy to use and well built. I have used many macro's and imo this is one of the best
|
|
|
Dec 5, 2006
|
|
Nick De Marco
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp and fast. Can be used on both cropped and full frame. Excellent price.
|
|
Cons:
|
I am not a fan of Sigma lens hoods or focus bands.
|
|
I am no macro expert, and rarely experiment with macro. So I bought this lens as it was well reviewed but not too expensive.
I have been very impressed with the quality and sharpness of this lenss, for both macro and portrait photography for which I use it just as much.
I have mainly used this on a 350D, but recently purchased a 5D and I find it works well on that too. I only use L lenses on my 5D, or the Canon 50mm f.1.4. But in terms of image quality and sharpness I find this lens is as goodas most oif them and good enough for my 5D. Considering its price it is therefore great value for money so far as I am concerend.
I have a gallery of ppics taken with this lens on both the 350D and 5D at:
http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/105
|
|
|
Oct 10, 2006
|
|
bocaminus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 486
|
|
Review Date: Sep 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Well built, sharp & lightweight
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far
|
|
I got mine 2 months ago and I am more than happy with it. I shoot product and food photography and as an ex EF 100mm f/2.8 macro owner I was looking for something in this class. I sold my Canon macro 3-4 months ago and I was on the verge of buying it again. After I read all reviews about this Sigma lens, I have decided to give it a try. First, I found this lens exceptionally accurate and sharp although, the focusing is a bit slower than Canon's USM. This is not in any shape and form disadvantage because photos I am taking are not time restrained. Considering this is my only Sigma glass besides all other Canon L lenses, it shines in all aspects. Colors are quite worm and accurate. On a full frame body it does a great job. The build quality, in my opinion is better than Canon 100 macro. AF can be sometimes troubling but that happens with almost all macro lenses in restricted light conditions. My recommendation for all of potential Canon 100mm macro buyers ... before you make your decision, go to your local camera store and take some test shots with this awesome lens. Make a comparison and then choose your macro glass.
These are some of the shots taken with Sigma 105mm f/2.8:
http://www.minus14.com/pixelpost/index.php?showimage=47
http://www.minus14.com/pixelpost/index.php?showimage=42
http://www.minus14.com/pixelpost/index.php?showimage=43
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2006
|
|
routerguy666
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 16, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Optical quality, build
|
|
Cons:
|
push/pull nonsense, extending front element
|
|
|
The best thing about this lense is its performance when stopped down. For most macro work you are shooting at F22 or higher and the optical quality here is defintely tailored for all your bug and flower shot needs.
As a 100mm telephoto, this lense isn't worth putting on the camera. Ok, it's not entirely that bad, but buy it for macro use or shop elsewhere to meet your needs. At wider apertures the image quality isn't nearly as good as that which many other lenses will provide.
Autofocus is a bit noisy and not so quick. Lense hood is a nice include.
If you are into macro shots, this is is your lense. If you are looking for a do-it-all 100mm, keep looking.
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2006
|
|
GraphyFotoz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 14, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 805
|
|
Review Date: Aug 31, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super Sharp! VERY well built. Has a limit focus switch.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hunts now and then but if used for macro I tend to manual focus anyway!
The screwn in METAL lens hood is a PITA for filter use!!
|
|
|
I have had my EX DG copy for a year now.
Find it hard to not use this all the time!
I'm told it also makes a super portrait lens as well but never used it for that yet.
Sometimes wonder if I shoulda got the 150mm version...esp since I take nature shots 95% of the time.
AF is pretty good for distance shots but like fore mentioned best in manual mode for close work.
Simply hate the screw in METAL hood!!!
Reguardless this is a fun lens to play with and you'll love it's creamy smooth bokah!
Just a wonderful lens. You can't go wrong with this one!
|
|
|
Aug 31, 2006
|
|
kalinorbrause
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jul 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
image quality, great macro lens, probably the best macro lens for your money
|
|
Cons:
|
focus too slow if used other than macro
|
|
|
This is probably the best Sigma lens. You get excellent image quality for your money. I own this lens for more than 3 years and I am very happy with it. It is also very useful as a portrait lens with crop cameras. The build quality beats the canon 100 macro.
If you´re looking for an affordable and L-ish macro lens go for the Sigma!
|
|
|
Jul 14, 2006
|
|
hedredm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Jun 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent image quality, great performance for the price
|
|
Cons:
|
The way focus is switched from auto to manual
|
|
|
I've had it for about 3 months, and I've taken great pictures with this lens. I only wish I had bought it sooner.
And now onto some nit picky stuff. The build quality is good, but the focus ring seems like it can fall off pretty easily. The lens has a weird design(at least to me) where if you want to switch from auto focus to manual focus, you have to flip the ubiquitous little switch near the mount, but you *also* have to pull/push the focus ring to switch it to auto/manual mode. It feels like it can fall off while you're switching it.
|
|
|
Jun 21, 2006
|
|
radiodenver
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 490
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $379.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build. Very sharp images from f3.5 on up to f14, quite usable below and beyond.
|
|
Cons:
|
As a macro lens, nothing to complain about. As a portrait lens, the focus is a tad slow.
|
|
|
This is an outstanding lens. A bit different from other lenses operationally, but once I got used to the functionality, it was not problem and in a way it is growing on me.
I get very very sharp images from this lens. The bokeh could be better but it's not horrible. I wouldn't try using it on fast action scenes that require a quick focus. In macro mode, it can't be outdone.
A very good buy and worth the price. If you're looking for a good prime lens in this focal range, stop looking.
|
|
|
May 15, 2006
|
|
kevindar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1930
|
|
Review Date: May 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $330.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
fantastic image quailty from f 4 on.
|
|
Cons:
|
Extends while focusing, slow and clumsy focusing.
|
|
|
maybe all macro lenses are slow focusing. thats my biggest beef with this lens. I dont think there is much difference in image quality between the various manufacturers (canon, sigma, tamron).
|
|
|
May 8, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
73
|
211474
|
Jan 12, 2011
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
92% of reviewers
|
$340.72
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.68
|
9.47
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
