In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
p.5 #1In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
j4nu wrote:
.
Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.htmlSigma's CEO commented that AF was slower compared to non-macro lenses because an entire element group has to move back and forward and although not fast, it would be extremely accurate when shooting macro. I'm not sure if this is marketing talk but at least there was an explanation for this. He also said that tolerance would have to be even tighter for the optical design to work as designed.Thanks, I'll guess we'll have to see how slow it really is in actual use.
Isn’t the slower AF generally the case for macro lenses though? I haven’t had one since I switched away from Nikon years ago, but remember when I would use it in AF it was much slower than other lenses, but once it locked it was very solid.
Fred Miranda wrote
j4nu wrote
The thing about 35mm f1.2 firmware update bug is that there seems to be some randomness to it as some people are not reporting any issues at all under the same conditions. In general, I'm happy with the way Sigma supports its DG DN lenses, so I hope this one is an exception, rather than the rule .Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.html
Isn’t the slower AF generally the case for macro lenses though? I haven’t had one since I switched away from Nikon years ago, but remember when I would use it in AF it was much slower than other lenses, but once it locked it was very solid.
Oct 01, 2020 at 12:40 PM
p.5 #2In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
wittyphrase wrote:
.
Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.htmlSigma's CEO commented that AF was slower compared to non-macro lenses because an entire element group has to move back and forward and although not fast, it would be extremely accurate when shooting macro. I'm not sure if this is marketing talk but at least there was an explanation for this. He also said that tolerance would have to be even tighter for the optical design to work as designed.Thanks, I'll guess we'll have to see how slow it really is in actual use.Isn’t the slower AF generally the case for macro lenses though? I haven’t had one since I switched away from Nikon years ago, but remember when I would use it in AF it was much slower than other lenses, but once it locked it was very solid.
Yeah, I mostly meant AF speed compared to Sony...
j4nu wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
j4nu wrote
The thing about 35mm f1.2 firmware update bug is that there seems to be some randomness to it as some people are not reporting any issues at all under the same conditions. In general, I'm happy with the way Sigma supports its DG DN lenses, so I hope this one is an exception, rather than the rule .Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.html
Yeah, I mostly meant AF speed compared to Sony...
Oct 01, 2020 at 02:06 PM
p.5 #3In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
realVivek wrote:
Yet another factor to consider (down the road) is the support and compatibility. There is a recent thread by freaklikeme on the sad Sigma 150mm macro in EOS mount.
It looks like it will beat the FE 90/2.8 in axial CA control. That may not be enough for current Sony owners to make the switch but it's something to consider. The Sony is sharp and contrasty at center but how the corners compared to the new Sigma? I do not know but it's worth investigating, especially for those in the market for a macro lens.There's also a mild focus shift:
https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/focus-shift-and-loca-in-the-sony-90mm-f2-8-at-110/
To be clear, I skipped the Sony a few years ago because I was contemplating a huge slide scanning project. For that particular purpose the CA did not recommend it, I've seen somewhere on the net a comparison of Sony with vintage Nikkor and Zuiko for slide duplication purposes and the Sony wasn't the winner. The Sigma 70 was the better lens for that purpose, however I skipped it too since it would had little use beyond that project. And yes I am aware of the the great APO Lanthar 110 however I didn't fancy manually focusing on thousands of slides.
Back to the Sony - beyond the specific purpose of slide scanning and repro use, I don't find any issues with it. If I were looking at flowers and bugs, the OIS would be more useful I think than less CA.This Sigma release got me thinking what's the best (well the most all-round at least) macro choice for Sony now...
Does OIS gives significantly better results then IBIS alone in macro usage?The more exact question is: does the OIS+IBIS on the Sony 90 work significantly better than IBIS on the Sigma 105? We don't know at this point, but as an educated guess, electronically controlled things like AF and stabilization have historically worked better on Sony lenses than third party ones.
It's the 180/2.8, and it's specific to the MC-11. It works beautifully on the MB IV. Still, the point's valid. Adapting lenses is always a crap shoot.
Yet another factor to consider (down the road) is the support and compatibility. There is a recent thread by freaklikeme on the sad Sigma 150mm macro in EOS mount.
vdo1 wrote
j4nu wrote
vdo1 wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
pdmphoto wrote
My Sony FE 90 tested to be about "equal" for overall IQ compared to the Voigtlander 105 APO macro I had; and posted some of those results on the CV 105 APO thread. The main advantage of the Voigtlander was obviously the APO'ness, but even the 90 isn't too bad in that regard I love the colors, contrast, and bokeh I get from the FE 90 AF/MF clutch works great in the field. It is also 110g lighter than the new Sigma. I'm a big fan of the 14-24 and 24-70 Sigma Arts's, but this one doesn't do it for me. I don't see anything about the Sigma that would make me want it over the Sony 90.https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/focus-shift-and-loca-in-the-sony-90mm-f2-8-at-110/
To be clear, I skipped the Sony a few years ago because I was contemplating a huge slide scanning project. For that particular purpose the CA did not recommend it, I've seen somewhere on the net a comparison of Sony with vintage Nikkor and Zuiko for slide duplication purposes and the Sony wasn't the winner. The Sigma 70 was the better lens for that purpose, however I skipped it too since it would had little use beyond that project. And yes I am aware of the the great APO Lanthar 110 however I didn't fancy manually focusing on thousands of slides.
Back to the Sony - beyond the specific purpose of slide scanning and repro use, I don't find any issues with it. If I were looking at flowers and bugs, the OIS would be more useful I think than less CA.
Does OIS gives significantly better results then IBIS alone in macro usage?
It's the 180/2.8, and it's specific to the MC-11. It works beautifully on the MB IV. Still, the point's valid. Adapting lenses is always a crap shoot.
Oct 01, 2020 at 03:09 PM
p.5 #4In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Or maybe I'm just jaded about new lenses. Every time I see one announced these days, my first thought is, "And how many of them are you going to produce that perform to that specification?" The more complex the lens, the less confident I am that percentage will be high.The Sony is also 5mm shorter.
I think we have already superb macro lenses and any improvement from new lenses won't be substantial. However, I don't think we can dismiss the improvements in axial CA correction and higher resolution across the field from newer designs.
For those with good copies of the FE 90/2.8 (which is rare), it's hard to see a reason to upgrade but there are many shooters looking for a macro lens and I would say the Sigma looks better than the Sony in price and IQ.
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap. Also i'm a lover for stabilization, and i'm sad Sigma did'nt use it. On cloudy days shutter speeds will be lot worse if insect sits on still subject like big branch. So i'm not ready yet to see the Sigma as a better deal (for instance the sigma 100-400mm is by far better deal then GM, even though i own this last lens and love it.)
freaklikeme wrote
The Sigma may give you a little lift in absolute resolution and color correction, but I'd take this into consideration when comparing the two. The G is 100+ grams lighter, has OSS, has what I think is one of the best MF designs for FBW lenses, and gives you, thanks to the similarity in MFD and difference in physical length, about three and a half more centimeters working distance at 1:1. It may not sound like much, but every centimeter counts when you're trying to light something tiny.Or maybe I'm just jaded about new lenses. Every time I see one announced these days, my first thought is, "And how many of them are you going to produce that perform to that specification?" The more complex the lens, the less confident I am that percentage will be high.
I think we have already superb macro lenses and any improvement from new lenses won't be substantial. However, I don't think we can dismiss the improvements in axial CA correction and higher resolution across the field from newer designs.
For those with good copies of the FE 90/2.8 (which is rare), it's hard to see a reason to upgrade but there are many shooters looking for a macro lens and I would say the Sigma looks better than the Sony in price and IQ.
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap. Also i'm a lover for stabilization, and i'm sad Sigma did'nt use it. On cloudy days shutter speeds will be lot worse if insect sits on still subject like big branch. So i'm not ready yet to see the Sigma as a better deal (for instance the sigma 100-400mm is by far better deal then GM, even though i own this last lens and love it.)
Oct 01, 2020 at 03:19 PM
p.5 #5In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
j4nu wrote:
.
Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.htmlSigma's CEO commented that AF was slower compared to non-macro lenses because an entire element group has to move back and forward and although not fast, it would be extremely accurate when shooting macro. I'm not sure if this is marketing talk but at least there was an explanation for this. He also said that tolerance would have to be even tighter for the optical design to work as designed.Thanks, I'll guess we'll have to see how slow it really is in actual use.Isn’t the slower AF generally the case for macro lenses though? I haven’t had one since I switched away from Nikon years ago, but remember when I would use it in AF it was much slower than other lenses, but once it locked it was very solid.Yeah, I mostly meant AF speed compared to Sony...
Got it. My reading comprehension failed there.
wittyphrase wrote
j4nu wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
j4nu wrote
The thing about 35mm f1.2 firmware update bug is that there seems to be some randomness to it as some people are not reporting any issues at all under the same conditions. In general, I'm happy with the way Sigma supports its DG DN lenses, so I hope this one is an exception, rather than the rule .Back to the topic, how's Sony's 90 macro AF speed?
Sigma seems to be very much on the slow side according to initial impressions from preproduction sample:
https://www.lenstip.com/145.3-article-Sigma_A_105_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Macro_%E2%80%93_first_impressions_Autofocus__ghosting_and_flares.html
Got it. My reading comprehension failed there.
Oct 01, 2020 at 04:12 PM
p.5 #6In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Matti6950 wrote:
Or maybe I'm just jaded about new lenses. Every time I see one announced these days, my first thought is, "And how many of them are you going to produce that perform to that specification?" The more complex the lens, the less confident I am that percentage will be high.The Sony is also 5mm shorter.
I think we have already superb macro lenses and any improvement from new lenses won't be substantial. However, I don't think we can dismiss the improvements in axial CA correction and higher resolution across the field from newer designs.
For those with good copies of the FE 90/2.8 (which is rare), it's hard to see a reason to upgrade but there are many shooters looking for a macro lens and I would say the Sigma looks better than the Sony in price and IQ.With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap. Also i'm a lover for stabilization, and i'm sad Sigma did'nt use it. On cloudy days shutter speeds will be lot worse if insect sits on still subject like big branch. So i'm not ready yet to see the Sigma as a better deal (for instance the sigma 100-400mm is by far better deal then GM, even though i own this last lens and love it.)
In the US, the Sony costs $1,100 and the Sigma is $800, so at least here, if one buys a new lens, the difference will be $300. Of course this may vary depending on your country. You can also buy the Sony used but it still sells for more than $800 and unless you can return it, it's a big risk based on its high copy variance. I've tried multiple copies and they all had significant focal plane tilt.
It's always nice to have OSS and not having it is a negative for the new Sigma. However, OSS is not as effective at macro levels (1:1) and most Sony bodies are equipped with IBIS. I think it was a design compromise where Sigma had different priorities.
Fred Miranda wrote
freaklikeme wrote
The Sigma may give you a little lift in absolute resolution and color correction, but I'd take this into consideration when comparing the two. The G is 100+ grams lighter, has OSS, has what I think is one of the best MF designs for FBW lenses, and gives you, thanks to the similarity in MFD and difference in physical length, about three and a half more centimeters working distance at 1:1. It may not sound like much, but every centimeter counts when you're trying to light something tiny.Or maybe I'm just jaded about new lenses. Every time I see one announced these days, my first thought is, "And how many of them are you going to produce that perform to that specification?" The more complex the lens, the less confident I am that percentage will be high.
I think we have already superb macro lenses and any improvement from new lenses won't be substantial. However, I don't think we can dismiss the improvements in axial CA correction and higher resolution across the field from newer designs.
For those with good copies of the FE 90/2.8 (which is rare), it's hard to see a reason to upgrade but there are many shooters looking for a macro lens and I would say the Sigma looks better than the Sony in price and IQ.
In the US, the Sony costs $1,100 and the Sigma is $800, so at least here, if one buys a new lens, the difference will be $300. Of course this may vary depending on your country. You can also buy the Sony used but it still sells for more than $800 and unless you can return it, it's a big risk based on its high copy variance. I've tried multiple copies and they all had significant focal plane tilt.
It's always nice to have OSS and not having it is a negative for the new Sigma. However, OSS is not as effective at macro levels (1:1) and most Sony bodies are equipped with IBIS. I think it was a design compromise where Sigma had different priorities.
Oct 01, 2020 at 04:51 PM
p.5 #7In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Honestly this is disappointing as far as a release as there are some real needs for a lot of groups of shooters. For me I don’t make money with a macro. Usually a 85 with extension tubes is all I really need. I know many love shooting bugs,flowers and such. So I get it but I think we all had other ideas from Sigma
Oct 01, 2020 at 05:06 PM
p.5 #8In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly this is disappointing as far as a release as there are some real needs for a lot of groups of shooters. For me I don’t make money with a macro. Usually a 85 with extension tubes is all I really need. I know many love shooting bugs,flowers and such. So I get it but I think we all had other ideas from Sigma
Although mainly a macro lens, perhaps the new Sigma 100/2.8 Art can be versatile and used for portraits and landscape as well. However, it's yet to be seen how well it performs for these applications.
Honestly this is disappointing as far as a release as there are some real needs for a lot of groups of shooters. For me I don’t make money with a macro. Usually a 85 with extension tubes is all I really need. I know many love shooting bugs,flowers and such. So I get it but I think we all had other ideas from Sigma
Although mainly a macro lens, perhaps the new Sigma 100/2.8 Art can be versatile and used for portraits and landscape as well. However, it's yet to be seen how well it performs for these applications.
Oct 01, 2020 at 05:28 PM
p.5 #9In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
vdo1 wrote:
After the "large aperture new GM lenses" rumours, I'm rooting here for a GM 100mm, close focus at least, macro even better I it ain't happening, the Sigma will do fine for me
Sony already released that one: 100/2.8 GM STF with a close-range mode that mechanically shifts elements for a fully corrected 1:4, and a high-grade 1:2 with Canon 500D closeup diopter. Oh, yeah, OSS also.
After the "large aperture new GM lenses" rumours, I'm rooting here for a GM 100mm, close focus at least, macro even better
I it ain't happening, the Sigma will do fine for me Sony already released that one: 100/2.8 GM STF with a close-range mode that mechanically shifts elements for a fully corrected 1:4, and a high-grade 1:2 with Canon 500D closeup diopter. Oh, yeah, OSS also.
Oct 01, 2020 at 11:26 PM
p.5 #10In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Matti6950 wrote:
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap.
I'm seeing the Sigma listed for €850; and it might drop soon. I remember the Sony going for €570 last year on Black Friday.
We'll just have to be patient and see what happens.
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap.
I'm seeing the Sigma listed for €850; and it might drop soon. I remember the Sony going for €570 last year on Black Friday.
We'll just have to be patient and see what happens.
Oct 02, 2020 at 01:41 AM
|
p.5 #11In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
zz wrote:Matti6950 wrote
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap.We'll just have to be patient and see what happens.
Ok i now see it listed as 750€ (with a visual discount downward from 850€ not sure if temporary). Still quite similar in price to the Sony G macro. I'll await more reviews and a better time to decide wich to buy. Atm i'm focused on renovating house for a year, then i'll purchase stuff again probably.
Oct 02, 2020 at 05:32 AM
p.5 #12In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
rico wrote:
I it ain't happening, the Sigma will do fine for me Sony already released that one: 100/2.8 GM STF with a close-range mode that mechanically shifts elements for a fully corrected 1:4, and a high-grade 1:2 with Canon 500D closeup diopter. Oh, yeah, OSS also.
I already have that one It's awesome, however I do see myself using an 100mm with classic rendering too, especially if it's a macro. One can never have too many 100mm lenses
DSC07841 by vdo1, on Flickr
vdo1 wrote
After the "large aperture new GM lenses" rumours, I'm rooting here for a GM 100mm, close focus at least, macro even better I it ain't happening, the Sigma will do fine for me I already have that one
It's awesome, however I do see myself using an 100mm with classic rendering too, especially if it's a macro. One can never have too many 100mm lenses DSC07841 by vdo1, on Flickr
Oct 02, 2020 at 05:38 AM
p.5 #13In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Sigma's 180mm f2.8 A-Mount version works with the LA-EA3 and provides 5 axis stabilization and fast SSM focusing. I sold my copy months ago but this new lens has me thinking of getting back in the macro game
Oct 02, 2020 at 06:41 AM
p.5 #15In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Matti6950 wrote:
I'm seeing the Sigma listed for €850; and it might drop soon. I remember the Sony going for €570 last year on Black Friday.
We'll just have to be patient and see what happens.Ok i now see it listed as 750€ (with a visual discount downward from 850€ not sure if temporary). Still quite similar in price to the Sony G macro. I'll await more reviews and a better time to decide wich to buy. Atm i'm focused on renovating house for a year, then i'll purchase stuff again probably.
The Sony is ~820€ in my country (regular price, brand new), whereas the new Sigma sells for 930€. Not sure what the strategy is here, but I most certainly am not buying the Sigma if it costs more.
zz wrote
Matti6950 wrote
With cashback Sony 90mm macro G is 870€ in Belgium (used 800-850€), new sigma will probably be 899-999€, that is not Cheap.We'll just have to be patient and see what happens.
The Sony is ~820€ in my country (regular price, brand new), whereas the new Sigma sells for 930€. Not sure what the strategy is here, but I most certainly am not buying the Sigma if it costs more.
Oct 06, 2020 at 12:38 PM
p.5 #16In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
It's 755 (Sigma) to 975 (Sony) eur equivalent (with VAT) in my case...
So the "Sony extra" is tangible for OSS + better MF (I guess AF too), but probably a bit worse optical performance if we can trust early reviews.
So the "Sony extra" is tangible for OSS + better MF (I guess AF too), but probably a bit worse optical performance if we can trust early reviews.
Oct 06, 2020 at 01:04 PM
p.5 #17In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Brick and mortar stores here Sigma 1199 CAD vs Sony 1499 CAD. The Sony periodically gets a 100 discount to 1399.
For this difference I wouldn't let the price alone guide my choice.
For this difference I wouldn't let the price alone guide my choice.
Oct 06, 2020 at 05:53 PM
p.5 #18In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly this is disappointing as far as a release as there are some real needs for a lot of groups of shooters. For me I don’t make money with a macro. Usually a 85 with extension tubes is all I really need. I know many love shooting bugs,flowers and such. So I get it but I think we all had other ideas from Sigma
Are you aware of any high quality and reliable extension tubes in the Sony E-mount? I read about Kenko, and other thirds party option but the reviews are discouraging. I recently bought one off Ebay claiming to be made of metal (quoted 'all metal'). When it arrived, I noticed the mounts were silver painted plastic and the built quality just felt flimsy. The adapter mounts on both sides were wobbling. I don't trust attaching an expensive lens on it. If a reputable manufacturer builds all metal extension tubes for the Sony E-mount, I will certainly buy it.
Honestly this is disappointing as far as a release as there are some real needs for a lot of groups of shooters. For me I don’t make money with a macro. Usually a 85 with extension tubes is all I really need. I know many love shooting bugs,flowers and such. So I get it but I think we all had other ideas from Sigma
Are you aware of any high quality and reliable extension tubes in the Sony E-mount? I read about Kenko, and other thirds party option but the reviews are discouraging. I recently bought one off Ebay claiming to be made of metal (quoted 'all metal'). When it arrived, I noticed the mounts were silver painted plastic and the built quality just felt flimsy. The adapter mounts on both sides were wobbling. I don't trust attaching an expensive lens on it. If a reputable manufacturer builds all metal extension tubes for the Sony E-mount, I will certainly buy it.
Oct 06, 2020 at 08:31 PM
p.5 #19In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Not sure if this review was posted:
https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/09/30/sigma-105mm-f2-8-dg-dn-macro-art/
https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/09/30/sigma-105mm-f2-8-dg-dn-macro-art/
Oct 07, 2020 at 03:23 AM
p.5 #20In Stock: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art ($799)
Too bad it doesn't support Canon for now. I owned the 70 macro and it's superb, the sharpest 70mm ever!
Oct 10, 2020 at 07:51 PM