p.13 #2 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
I shoot with an RIV and own the 24gm, Samyang 45 1.8, 90 macro, 135gm, and Sigma 100-400. The 90 macro is my least used lens, but when I want it nothing else will do. I use the 24 and 135 most often. Am I crazy to consider selling both the 90 and 135 for this 105 macro?
p.13 #3 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
brianaabram wrote:
I shoot with an RIV and own the 24gm, Samyang 45 1.8, 90 macro, 135gm, and Sigma 100-400. The 90 macro is my least used lens, but when I want it nothing else will do. I use the 24 and 135 most often. Am I crazy to consider selling both the 90 and 135 for this 105 macro?
Repeat after me "I will never sell my Sony 135mm f/1.8 GM". It is a special lens in so many respects. The Sigma 105mm Macro will be a very nice portrait lens, but it will not match the Sony 135mm GM
The difference in IQ between the Sigma 105, and Sony 90 for macro work does exist, but it is small at best. The Sony focuses faster, and has stabilization. Your images won't be noticeably better with the Sigma.
Yes, macro lenses are much like tuxedos. You don't need them often, but when you do, nothing else will do.
p.13 #4 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
brianaabram wrote:
I shoot with an RIV and own the 24gm, Samyang 45 1.8, 90 macro, 135gm, and Sigma 100-400. The 90 macro is my least used lens, but when I want it nothing else will do. I use the 24 and 135 most often. Am I crazy to consider selling both the 90 and 135 for this 105 macro?
I would just stay course with the existing setup. Unless you're contemplating large projects of reproduction work or commercial product & architecture photography. There the Sigma would have a visible edge with the very well corrected chromatic abberations.
Nov 21, 2020 at 02:37 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.13 #5 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
brianaabram wrote:
I shoot with an RIV and own the 24gm, Samyang 45 1.8, 90 macro, 135gm, and Sigma 100-400. The 90 macro is my least used lens, but when I want it nothing else will do. I use the 24 and 135 most often. Am I crazy to consider selling both the 90 and 135 for this 105 macro?
it would depend on what you shoot... 135mm is pretty long for indoor event shooting, and really even 105mm starts to become a problem.
the fe135 has four xd linear af motors, it's one of the fastest-focusing lenses on the planet, probably quicker than its current 20fps rating on the a9/a9ii... it would be an incredible lens for shooting sports, and it's obviously an xlnt portrait lens, i can't imagine anyone wanting to give it up
i think that the fe90 has a certain look to it... for example, i posted an old fe90 beach handball pic to the "which lens has the most 3D POP?" thread, and it turned out to be one of the most popular pics in the entire thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/983034/1
15fps with a macro lens? and it has 3d-pop? sony, what were you thinking
all of the recent sigma lenses appear to be total winners, including the 135 art and the 60-600 that i've used on the a9... it's just that sony beat both of those lenses with the fe135 and the 200-600, and as good as the sigma 105 macro appears to be, i don't see it being a substitute for the fe90... it's a xlnt cheaper alternative for people who don't already have the fe90.
p.13 #6 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Just got my Sigma last friday and today I went on a walk with my lovely daughter and finally got to use it in better lighting. Gotta say this is one sharp lens with sublime rendering. So far there is zero regret that I sold my FE 85mm so I could replace it with this 105mm lens. My main workhorse is the CV 50mm f/1.2 and the 85mm felt always a bit too close to that and 105mm gaps better with the 50mm.
I've never really been a macro shooter, but this lens it will surely open up some new possibilities for me. I really hope Sigma will introduce some compatible teleconverters for this lens. Apparently they have such for L mount, but not for Sony.
p.13 #7 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Tonzah78 wrote:
Just got my Sigma last friday. Just went on a walk with my lovely daughter and finally got to use it in better lighting. Gotta say this is one sharp lens with sublime rendering. So far there is zero regret that I sold my FE 85mm so I could replace it with this 105mm lens. My main workhorse is the CV 50mm f/1.2 and the 85mm felt always a bit too close to that and 105mm gaps better with the 50mm.
I've never really been a macro shooter, but this lens it will surely open up some new possibilities for me. I really hope Sigma will introduce some compatible teleconverters for this lens. Apparently they have such for L mount, but not for Sony.
Nice pics!
And regarding: Tonzah78 wrote:
I really hope Sigma will introduce some compatible teleconverters for this lens. Apparently they have such for L mount, but not for Sony.
It won't happen, because Sony prohibits (legally) Sigma from making tcs unfortunately...
p.13 #12 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
It's 15 elements/11 groups vs 17 elements/12 groups
I guess you are saying more optical complexity is a plus, if so then I guess that falls on the Sigma side. And in terms of special glass, it's almost as well corrected as my CV 110.
-Tim
osv2 wrote:
i didn't have a problem with that, and i haven't seen many complaints about it either.
why? you must have not read this thread or looked at the link i just posted.
1) optical stabilization
2) DDSM faster focusing
3) shorter focal length
4) lighter weight
5) slightly better mfd
6) 15 Elements/11 Groups vs. 12 Elements/7 Groups
sigma didn't go all-out on this 105 macro, it doesn't have the higher-end ELD/FLD elements that they put in some of their other lenses.
p.13 #13 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
osv2 wrote:
why? you must have not read this thread or looked at the link i just posted.
6) 15 Elements/11 Groups vs. 12 Elements/7 Groups
sigma didn't go all-out on this 105 macro, it doesn't have the higher-end ELD/FLD elements that they put in some of their other lenses.
And yet somehow Sigma built a lens that is as sharp or sharper over a broader set of apertures, and a wider part of the frame, is better distortion corrected, and has less CA. For less money. Hmmmm...
p.13 #14 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Yeah, I see this spiralling into a on paper argument. I've never shot the FE 90, but I can say that optically that the Sigma doesn't really give up much to the CV 110, and vice versa, at least optically.
No arguing the FE 90 has OSS, clutch for MF, and faster AF. But I'd like to see an optical comparison before weighing in on that part. Unfortunately I don't have the FE 90.
I still can't get a clear day to do an infinity test between the Sigma and CV 110, unfortunately we've had pretty good soupy haze here ever day I've had off...for weeks now.
-Tim
1bwana1 wrote:
And yet somehow Sigma built a lens that is as sharp or sharper over a wider set of apertures, and a wider part of the frame, is better distortion corrected, and has less CA. For less money. Hmmmm...
The "counterlit morning dew in the grass" pic is easy to take and compare. If one doesn't have grass at this time of the year, I've provided one with the Sigma earlier in this thread. The Sony shows "onion rings" and very rough polishing of one or more elements. Dustin uses to take that pic for many lenses so you can compare with more than the Sigma.
Dustin also has a review where he directly compares the sharpness of the two lenses:
Ken frequently uses a picture of a wristwatch to document CA. This is easy to replicate at home and also to compare with his reviews of other lenses. The CA there is quite visible.
Strictly from an optical pov, I would say that it is the Sigma that is the most accomplished of these two lenses.
tsdevine wrote:
I guess you are saying more optical complexity is a plus, if so then I guess that falls on the Sigma side.
i am, and it apparently does, but at the expense of no ois and more weight.
also minus the high-end elements that sigma uses in their better lenses.
tsdevine wrote:
And in terms of special glass, it's almost as well corrected as my CV 110.
not an issue for the fe90 in real-world use: "Chromatic aberration: When it comes to longitudinal chromatic aberration, you can find its traces in photos, presented below, but they are very slight; it means that aberration shouldn't bother you in real life... Already by f/4.0 the lateral chromatic aberration decreases to near 0.05% and it becomes low. In the most popular range for a macro lens, so from f/5.6 to f/16 apertures, the aberration remains negligible as its value amounts to about 0.02%." https://www.lenstip.com/561.5-Lens_review-Sony_FE_90_mm_f_2.8_Macro_G_OSS_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
the only manual focus macro lens that i'd be interested in would be the laowa 2x, duplicating 1:1 macro capability with multiple lenses is not very practical.
Nov 22, 2020 at 02:53 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.13 #17 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
1bwana1 wrote:
And yet somehow Sigma built a lens that is as sharp or sharper over a broader set of apertures, and a wider part of the frame, is better distortion corrected, and has less CA. For less money. Hmmmm...
but you couldn't come up with a link to actual mtf/distortion measurements that prove that...
i am, and it apparently does, but at the expense of no ois and more weight.
also minus the high-end elements that sigma uses in their better lenses.
not an issue for the fe90 in real-world use: "Chromatic aberration: When it comes to longitudinal chromatic aberration, you can find its traces in photos, presented below, but they are very slight; it means that aberration shouldn't bother you in real life... Already by f/4.0 the lateral chromatic aberration decreases to near 0.05% and it becomes low. In the most popular range for a macro lens, so from f/5.6 to f/16 apertures, the aberration remains negligible as its value amounts to about 0.02%." https://www.lenstip.com/561.5-Lens_review-Sony_FE_90_mm_f_2.8_Macro_G_OSS_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
the only manual focus macro lens that i'd be interested in would be the laowa 2x, duplicating 1:1 macro capability with multiple lenses is not very practical.
p.13 #19 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
osv2 wrote:
but you couldn't come up with a link to actual mtf/distortion measurements that prove that...
I can never seem find one of those MTF critters to take a picture of so I can compare. I guess they are very shy and difficult to capture an image of.
So, I must be content comparing images of what I take pictures of. In these cases I am very impressed with the IQ of the Sigma, and also was when I took some pictures with the Sony 90mm macro.
One of the things I take pictures of is portraits dead U.S. Presidents. I know right where to find them. They are on all the dollar bills I saved by buying the Sigma instead of the Sony.
Nov 22, 2020 at 03:50 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.13 #20 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
vdo1 wrote:
The "counterlit morning dew in the grass" pic is easy to take and compare. If one doesn't have grass at this time of the year, I've provided one with the Sigma earlier in this thread. The Sony shows "onion rings" and very rough polishing of one or more elements.
link or it didn't happen.
i've never seen bokeh problems with my fe90, it has xlnt creamy bokeh.
vdo1 wrote:
Dustin uses to take that pic for many lenses so you can compare with more than the Sigma.
Dustin also has a review where he directly compares the sharpness of the two lenses:
and the Sony is not the winner.
i don't see any actual mtf measurements? and far more importantly, did he test it at macro distances:
"The Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro totally shocked me. It’s clearly better at all frequencies at macro distances. In fact, it’s the highest resolving off all these lenses at macro distances, at least in the image center. I’m not certain if it’s related or just coincidence, but the Sony lens has electronic motors controlling both the focusing and the compensating element. As best I know, all of the other macro lenses tested have mechanical movements of the compensating elements.
..We also confirmed that the shape of field curvature does change a bit at different focusing distances. And I learned that lens designers apparently take this into account to flatten the field at macro shooting distances."
vdo1 wrote:
Ken frequently uses a picture of a wristwatch to document CA. This is easy to replicate at home and also to compare with his reviews of other lenses. The CA there is quite visible.
ken rockwell? seriously?
whatever... funny how you left off the part where he shot the watch face at f/2.8, and you also failed to quote what he said: "This is great performance for an 90mm lens this close at f/2.8; it's super sharp and has no spherical aberration to lower contrast."
vdo1 wrote:
Strictly from an optical pov, I would say that it is the Sigma that is the most accomplished of these two lenses.
how often do you shoot macro at f/2.8? why would anyone want to do that?
your fanboy side is outweighing your logical impartial side
