Folks if your using a RRS ball head with lever clamp there is no adjustment for thickness of the Arca mount it’s why I asked. With the Arca Swiss Z1 lever ball head it is adjustable. Sooo if your sporting a RRS stuff lever clamp than you need to buy another ball head or add a plate that does fit. I’m thinking of getting one so I need to know this. A screw thread ball head won’t matter but a lever clamp depending on brand will. I’ve run into this many of times
I see it was a Kirk ball head so can anyone confirm the RRS lever clamp please
hodad_66 wrote:
The shape of the Sigma foot seems to be rounded somewhat. I can tighten the
clamp down as much as possible and the lens will still rock. It is a Kirk ballhead
but I don't know what model number.
That's not good. I can lock mine fine (Sirui), FWIW. The foot on my copy seems to be flat.
I used my Sony A7rIII and the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art last night for the eclipse. I shoes to go wide so I could get a star field behind it and the moon is to the right of the beehive open cluster (M44). The camera/lens setup was guided on my AstroTrac. I like the way it turned out.... Questions?
I love this lens! I had the Nikon 105mm f/1.4 prior to the Sigma when I was shooting Nikon. But this Sigma lens is so much better. This post doesn’t pop up much. I guess owners of this lens shoot plenty of photos with it but don’t post the finished work. I usually go to instagram and search for photos taken with this lens. I wish there were more here.
Anyway, the Sigma is so sharp, I love the bokeh as well. Please share your latest images
How do you feel about handling the Sigma compared to the Nikon, I have the Nikon and love it on my A9, but would really like to get rid of adapter hassle. I’m however worried about the size/weight.
Kind Rgds Peter
I really like this Sigma lens a lot. It’s definitely sharper than the Nikon, not by a huge margin, but you can definitely tell. I enjoyed the Nikon version when I had it, it is easier to hold. The Sigma isn’t hard to hold either. It weighs about 1.5 pounds more than the Nikon 105. The tripod foot on the Sigma really helps with holding it, it’s like a little handle. I’ll rotate the foot 90° when shooting vertical shots and put that foot in the palm of my hand. With a 105mm aperture, it puts the Nikon lens to shame. I like the larger aperture for astrophotography, lots of resolution, of course the Nikon model is no slouch either, I had issues with both Nikon 105mm lenses, I went through two copies... the first one had so much dust under the front element, I sent it to Nikon to have them clean it, eventually more dust showed up. I sold it and bought another one. The second copy stayed clean for quite a while and then I started seeing some dust inside. That’s when I decided to switch to Sony and get rid of my Nikon D850
Anyway the built-in adapter on the sigma 105 works really well, it focuses fast and the eye AF works well too. It’s longer with the built in adapter, but it doesn’t bother me. After using it for several shoots, I don’t even notice the weight. It’s my favorite portrait lens. Second in line is the Sony 85mm f/1.4G Master. Do you have a local camera store nearby to where you can test the Sigma out? It’s a great lens, and think you’d be happy with it. Manny Ortiz on YouTube has a good review on it. The video isn’t very long, you should look him up. I added a couple more shots taken with the Sigma 105.
PeterL6312 wrote:
How do you feel about handling the Sigma compared to the Nikon, I have the Nikon and love it on my A9, but would really like to get rid of adapter hassle. I’m however worried about the size/weight.
Kind Rgds Peter
Thanks Todd,
Great pics !
I really like the 105 focal length, used to have the 85GM also, which is a great lens, but the 105 got more use despite hassle with adapter. Sounds that I’ll probably would enjoy the Sigma, need to get to a shop and test handling it. Thanks again for you elaborate answer, really helpful !
Kind Rgds , Peter
So, I’ve been using the Sigma 105 Art e mount every day for the last month or so as my only lens. I used it in place of all other lenses, but primarily the 70-200gm.
I used it for portraits, birds, street, landscape, etc. didn’t find it to be too heavy, though unwieldy a bit and sucks to take on a plane.
The images you can create are amazing. Tack sharp at wide open and, aside form swirls in a super busy background, beautiful fall off, separation and nice compression.
However, the AF and Eye-Af are just not up to snuff for my fast moving subjects, or when I want a fast shot. The a9 would indicate various forms of focus acquired when totally out of focus, the eye-af was lame at best, and it is too slow to focus on dark, moving subjects that the 70-200GM can handle smoothly. I’ve never used the 85gm, but all of my GM lenses are fast and accurate.
This is a terrific lens, and something I wanted to use regularly. In the end, I’ll keep it but will also get the 135GM and hope for better AF. If a native 100mm 1.4 comes, that will be worth considering. But I may pair an 85GM with the 135 to replace the 105 (although it was not very expensive and I do love the results).
If I didn’t rely on the AF so much, and eye af/face detect, it’s a no brainer for regular use. But it’s a frustrating beast for me, and it may become relegated when newer options present.
If anything I appreciate the 70-200gm much more after 100+ hours of use.
glowrider wrote:
So, I’ve been using the Sigma 105 Art e mount every day for the last month or so as my only lens. I used it in place of all other lenses, but primarily the 70-200gm.
I used it for portraits, birds, street, landscape, etc. didn’t find it to be too heavy, though unwieldy a bit and sucks to take on a plane.
The images you can create are amazing. Tack sharp at wide open and, aside form swirls in a super busy background, beautiful fall off, separation and nice compression.
However, the AF and Eye-Af are just not up to snuff for my fast moving subjects, or when I want a fast shot. The a9 would indicate various forms of focus acquired when totally out of focus, the eye-af was lame at best, and it is too slow to focus on dark, moving subjects that the 70-200GM can handle smoothly. I’ve never used the 85gm, but all of my GM lenses are fast and accurate.
This is a terrific lens, and something I wanted to use regularly. In the end, I’ll keep it but will also get the 135GM and hope for better AF. If a native 100mm 1.4 comes, that will be worth considering. But I may pair an 85GM with the 135 to replace the 105 (although it was not very expensive and I do love the results).
If I didn’t rely on the AF so much, and eye af/face detect, it’s a no brainer for regular use. But it’s a frustrating beast for me, and it may become relegated when newer options present.
If anything I appreciate the 70-200gm much more after 100+ hours of use. ...Show more →
Thanks for sharing, I still have my Nikon 105, your experience makes me hesitate regarding the Sigma, more likely I'd go for the Sony 135 instead, even though I would prefer a 100-105 fl.
If I were to repurchase, I’d consider getting it in EF mount and an adapter if this is the same AF, since it would be functional across two systems so I could capture some extra value in exchange for the degraded AF performance. Again, I think the price is very reasonable for what it is, so that’s not a negative to me.
If this were a manual focus lens, in the same size, it’d get a 8.5/10 from me. Manual and size of the Nikon, a 9.5/10. The optics are fabulous and I’m unsure what can match it atm.
As an AF lens, it’s more of a 7.5-8/10 for me. Not necessarily a major workhorse, but not such a specialty lens that I will never use it and will regret its place in my lineup.
I don’t use the a9 to not use every ounce of the AF system possible - I wont confidently shoot 1.4 wide open anymore without assistance. Perhaps the new FW 5.0 will improve things for 3rd party lenses.
PeterL6312 wrote:
Thanks for sharing, I still have my Nikon 105, your experience makes me hesitate regarding the Sigma, more likely I'd go for the Sony 135 instead, even though I would prefer a 100-105 fl.
Anyone consider or have travel international with this beast? I'm thinking of bringing it to Italy & Switzerland along with 2 zoom lenses (14-24 2.8 & 24-70 2.8). Too much?
tbdinh wrote:
Anyone consider or have travel international with this beast? I'm thinking of bringing it to Italy & Switzerland along with 2 zoom lenses (14-24 2.8 & 24-70 2.8). Too much?
I have. The hood does make the lens a bit harder to pack. But I have packed the Sigma in with 4 other primes and an A9 in a PD 30L backpack with plenty of room up top for more accessories. However, I think it really depends on if you shoot a lot with 105 on a trip or not. Lens changing is not quite convenient with a big lens. If you bring two bodies, then it would be much better.
tbdinh wrote:
Anyone consider or have travel international with this beast? I'm thinking of bringing it to Italy & Switzerland along with 2 zoom lenses (14-24 2.8 & 24-70 2.8). Too much?
I packed it as the lens to take with me to Europe (Holland, Italy, Germany and Austria) for a 3-week trip. Then I decided against it, and packed the GM 85mm lens instead. I looked at the images taken with that lens again, and I changed my mind again and have decided to take that lens. There will be a fair amount of portraits scheduled on that trip, that’s the main reason. I will be leaving in 6 days.... In addition, I will be taking 3 zooms, 12-24, 24-105 and 100-400mm plus my favorite 24mm GM and Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4. Wish me, no, my back luck, guys , Just kidding, I will be taking everything in a roller bag and I could stagger or rotate the lens lineup as needed. I don’t have to have/carry all lenses all the time with me. So, that helps.
hiepphotog wrote:
I have. The hood does make the lens a bit harder to pack. But I have packed the Sigma in with 4 other primes and an A9 in a PD 30L backpack with plenty of room up top for more accessories. However, I think it really depends on if you shoot a lot with 105 on a trip or not. Lens changing is not quite convenient with a big lens. If you bring two bodies, then it would be much better.
I'm not planning to bring the hood. My 105 is my favorite portrait lens and is on my camera most of the time.
Two bodies is just too much on a vacation for me.
---------------------------------------------
AGeoJO wrote:
I packed it as the lens to take with me to Europe (Holland, Italy, Germany and Austria) for a 3-week trip. Then I decided against it, and packed the GM 85mm lens instead. I looked at the images taken with that lens again, and I changed my mind again and have decided to take that lens. There will be a fair amount of portraits scheduled on that trip, that’s the main reason. I will be leaving in 6 days.... In addition, I will be taking 3 zooms, 12-24, 24-105 and 100-400mm plus my favorite 24mm GM and Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4. Wish me, no, my back luck, guys , Just kidding, I will be taking everything in a roller bag and I could stagger or rotate the lens lineup as needed. I don’t have to have/carry all lenses all the time with me. So, that helps....Show more →
Wow okay I'm not the only crazy one :-p.
Yeah I think I'm going to bring it then. I can leave the lens in the hotel room if I'm going for a landscape hike.
Going to Italy and Switzerland is a once in a lifetime trip so I might as well bring it and have no regret leaving it behind. Thanks!
AGeoJO wrote:
I packed it as the lens to take with me to Europe (Holland, Italy, Germany and Austria) for a 3-week trip. Then I decided against it, and packed the GM 85mm lens instead. I looked at the images taken with that lens again, and I changed my mind again and have decided to take that lens. There will be a fair amount of portraits scheduled on that trip, that’s the main reason. I will be leaving in 6 days.... In addition, I will be taking 3 zooms, 12-24, 24-105 and 100-400mm plus my favorite 24mm GM and Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4. Wish me, no, my back luck, guys , Just kidding, I will be taking everything in a roller bag and I could stagger or rotate the lens lineup as needed. I don’t have to have/carry all lenses all the time with me. So, that helps....Show more →
I brought the 16-35GM, 24-105/4, 55/1.8, 24GM, and CV40 with me to Europe, all in a backpack. I figured it wouldn't be such a big deal to have them all on my back when I'm traveling to and from the airport and between train stations. I figured wrong. Your idea of putting it all in a roller is critical.
It’s so much easier having the GM and G version of the trinity zooms. I’ll take the 16-35/4, 70-200GM and new 135GM. Either a 24 1.4 or 35 1.4 if I feel I need a fast wide. Easy.
Otherwise, I’ll do 16-35GM, 70-200/4 and the Sigma 105, and one of the fast wides if required. Easy.
This fits with gripped a9 in my backpack in either config with room to spare. Generally, though, I’ll bring a roller with me and then I can haul more of my gear or carry more gear for the students. Generally it means lights get added. I do try to keep my kit as minimal as possible. I need my range a one or two fast primes and I’m a happy camper.
I recently used the 105mm as my solo daily driver for 30 days, so I think I’ve got a good feel on its place in my lineup and how I can leverage it beyond its stated purpose.
glowrider wrote:
If I were to repurchase, I’d consider getting it in EF mount and an adapter if this is the same AF, since it would be functional across two systems so I could capture some extra value in exchange for the degraded AF performance. Again, I think the price is very reasonable for what it is, so that’s not a negative to me.
I can't confirm this is the case with the 105/1.4, but I will say that with the 135/1.8, AF on the native Sony version is significantly better than the EF version with MC-11. Both performed similarly when shot wide open at medium focus ranges, but stop down beyond about f/2.8, and the EF version was near impossible to focus on distant subjects. This behavior does not occur with the native Sony E mount version of the lens. I do have other lenses that function just fine on the MC-11, but they also don't have a native E mount lens.
I have the 135mm GM in hand, and after shooting a while with it, I am pretty convinced that the 105mm from Sigma is easier and more comfortable to handhold despite being 1.5x heavier. I know the Sigma is significantly larger, but I love using the foot in my hand with the rounded corners. It is comfortable and doesn't really fatigue my hands. Great leverage. With the 135GM on my A9 gripped, it is just a killer. Literally. If someone gets too close - this will not only be good for self protection, but will probably work even better because you worked it in a bit. My hands are aching.
The 135GM is a beast. The AF is on another level than the 105mm. Pairing with a 85FE is a beautiful combo (fast acquisition and tracking on both, can fit both in just about the same space as the 105). Or just run with the 105 Sigma and execute on technique properly, and not lazily. It is a much easier/more forgiving lens than the 135GM. Wanted to share that here.
, Just kidding, I will be taking everything in a roller bag and I could stagger or rotate the lens lineup as needed. I don’t have to have/carry all lenses all the time with me. So, that helps.