p.24 #2 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Some beautiful shots here for sure.
If I might shuffle in from the side and attach myself to the thread like some horrible tick:
Am having the hardest time deciding between the Sony 90 G and this Sigma. Was going to go cheap and get the Sigma 105 OS HSM Canon EF version but it stopped being discounted here, bought a second hand Canon EF 100 Macro USM (non IS) and it turned out to have dried out focus ring grease or something for it could not be turned other than in discrete hops and stops. Many times with macro work I move the camera but sometimes it isn't physically possible. It's as if Fate stepped in and tried to say "Listen, you've tried compromising before, are you actually thick or what" in a kind of tactful way, though it could be the GAS demon.
I wouldn't use it for portraits but for landscape and macro work
Sometimes with a flash, sometimes without, mostly handheld, sometimes in bad lighting
I appreciate seeing the current magnification ratio, is that possible with the Sigma?
-Most seem to say AF in gloom is better with the Sony
-Most seem to say the Sigma is sharper in the borders and center wo
-Most seem to agree that for manual focusing the Sony has a great implementation, whereas some say the Sigma is fully ok and some that the ordinary fly-by-wire (non linear, possibly some delay, no hard stops) of the Sigma isn't great for macro work
-Some say that the OSS of the Sony makes a difference if you've a camera with IBIS, others that it doesn't so much, though it's hard to get actual numbers here
I could get the Sony for about 100e more than the Sigma.
If someone has any advice then that would be useful (including "Make a separate thread for this) )
p.24 #3 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
kaldur wrote:
Some beautiful shots here for sure.
If I might shuffle in from the side and attach myself to the thread like some horrible tick:
Am having the hardest time deciding between the Sony 90 G and this Sigma. Was going to go cheap and get the Sigma 105 OS HSM Canon EF version but it stopped being discounted here, bought a second hand Canon EF 100 Macro USM (non IS) and it turned out to have dried out focus ring grease or something for it could not be turned other than in discrete hops and stops. Many times with macro work I move the camera but sometimes it isn't physically possible. It's as if Fate stepped in and tried to say "Listen, you've tried compromising before, are you actually thick or what" in a kind of tactful way, though it could be the GAS demon.
I wouldn't use it for portraits but for landscape and macro work
Sometimes with a flash, sometimes without, mostly handheld, sometimes in bad lighting
I appreciate seeing the current magnification ratio, is that possible with the Sigma?
-Most seem to say AF in gloom is better with the Sony
-Most seem to say the Sigma is sharper in the borders and center wo
-Most seem to agree that for manual focusing the Sony has a great implementation, whereas some say the Sigma is fully ok and some that the ordinary fly-by-wire (non linear, possibly some delay, no hard stops) of the Sigma isn't great for macro work
-Some say that the OSS of the Sony makes a difference if you've a camera with IBIS, others that it doesn't so much, though it's hard to get actual numbers here
I could get the Sony for about 100e more than the Sigma.
If someone has any advice then that would be useful (including "Make a separate thread for this) )
I have the Sigma 105/2.8 Macro and owned the Sony 90/2.8 macro for years.
- They both AF well, but the Sony is more reliable
- They are both very sharp, but the Sigma is sharper
- MF is much more pleasant with the Sony. The Sigma's fly-by-wire MF is less precise and a little jerky
- I haven't noticed the lack of OSS on the Sigma being an important factor
- They are virtually equal in size and weight
- The Sigma is $300 cheaper than the Sony here in the US, but a used Sony is about the same price as a new Sigma
Bottom line - I think that the Sigma wins by a hair with regards to IQ. I think that the Sony wins by a mile in terms of MF and AF. They are both excellent lenses.
p.24 #4 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
smpetty wrote:
Many thanks for those pieces of experience.
Yeah, the price situation for Sony lenses here (in Sweden) released around 2016 are higher than on the release day...but Amazon.se opened just recently and they seem to play by totally different rules. It's a bit spooky for the Sigma can be had for the exact same price on amazon.se via a Swedish retailer that is a kind of local amazon and the lens comes from a Danish store, which is only marginally cheaper than the price from all the Swedish resellers. The Sony however is dearer today than on release day a number of years ago..except on Amazon.se which seems to have the same price as Amazon.de (VAT differences accounted for).
My next post will probably be in that lens' thread. If this thing isn't decentered/skewed which I've read is relatively common.
I really like this forum for the helpful people, traffic still and most of all Large Photos : )
p.24 #5 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
This is a focus stack hence, a processed image. I didn't plan the focus stacking in advance and didn't have my tripod with me. It was done handheld. The plant was about the size of the little finger.
I used to have the Sony 90mm macro. For macro, I almost exclusively do MF. So AF comparison is irrelevant. Of course, you don't want to use either one for action shots (AF tracking), lol. The Sigma has longer working distance if that matters to you. For me, this is one of the reasons to want to prefer the Sigma. So I am staying with it for now.
To keep it on topic, the FE 50mm definitely shows some LoCA (purplish / greenish tones in the fur). The Sigma 105mm does not show (to my eye) such artifacts, it's very clean and clear color wise.
P.S. I think Tina may be a Sony fan, she likes watching my camera
To keep it on topic, the FE 50mm definitely shows some LoCA (purplish / greenish tones in the fur). The Sigma 105mm does not show (to my eye) such artifacts, it's very clean and clear color wise.
P.S. I think Tina may be a Sony fan, she likes watching my camera
p.24 #12 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Well I've been following all of your evaluations of this lens, and holding off on buying it as a way of disciplining my GAS. But Amazon had it for $739 Prime and that finally broke me down.
p.24 #15 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Just received my 105 and slapped it on the A9 to take a few test shots. I recently moved over from Canon DSLR, so I'm still learning the A9, but so far I'm really happy with this lens.
Excited to see how well it plays on my A7R IV that should be here tomorrow! Hopefully I can finally ditch my 5DSR and leave the DSLR world for good.
p.24 #16 · In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
I have not read this thread but I’m not much of a macro guy but more for portraits I wanted something I can shoot in the studio . So I figured I’d try this out. Longest I have is the 75 1.8 and I like longer for portraits so expanded to 14,20,35,75,105. Nice kit
) 
