murthyksk wrote:
I do not know if a direct comparison between the subject lenses has been made. I went through the recent You Tube review by Dustin Abbott, which does not refer to the Sigma lens. Of course, the higher magnification and TC compatibility of the Sony set it quite apart. Is the Sigma still worth going for, I wonder.
I bought the Sigma 105 f2.8 macro based on Dustin Abbott's review. And I use it sparingly. IMHO? If one doesn't do macro all the time? I would just get the Sigma and be happy. The other less expensive option is the Tamron 90mm macro. There is no way I can afford the Sony 100mm macro at $1,500.
The 100mm Sony macro lens is not yet available beyond the testers. When it is, I’d be interested in how it compares to Sony’s own 100mm STF lens at close, but not macro, distances (eg, Christmas decorations, wedding artefacts). In such subjects, the out of focus areas matter as much as the in focus ones. Some of the previous posts show great out of focus rendering at macro distances for the new lens. I love the STF lens, but its effective aperture/light transmission can limit it to to tripod only (which may be inevitable for close ups). That said, the wider apertures are not that useful for close ups, so i think that the distinguishing feature comes down to rendering.
I own the Sigma 105mm macro and I had owned Sony 90mm macro and Laowa 100mm macro in the past. None of them were my usual take-out lens when I went out to shoot insects. I either use the Laowa 24mm Probe lens or a 100-400mm lens + a quality close-up filter mounted on it. I have better success rate with these options and I find the resulting photos matching my interest much better. However, my macro photography has so far been done only in manual focus. The new Sony lens seems like an enticing option if one wants to make use of AF. When combined with a recent Sony body (A7r v, A9 iii and A1 ii) the improved AF, the focus stacking and pre-capture features can make a meaningful difference. I am still on an older body (A7r iii) so for me it may not make much of a difference or improvement in my results. When I upgrade to a newer body, I would certainly be interested in the new Sony lens. IMO, one needs to look at a body/lens combo in order to evaluate if a new lens is worth upgrading or not.
j4nu wrote:
I think I've read somewhere that it's not the same clutch mechanism as in the 90mm... It's more like a AF/MF switch on the focus ring now from what I understand.
I stand corrected - Dustin Abbott's review states that it's still fully manual clutch.
With 1.4x TC IQ looks still pretty good too (similar to Tamron 90mm IMHO).
aboulenein wrote:
The new Sony 100mm Macro might a bit too much of a good thing for me . 95% of my macro lens use is for underwater photography of small critters. With the 90mm lens' 1.0x magnification, you can still manage to take the occasional photo of larger critters. That's an important aspect, since there's no changing lenses while diving. I'm wondering whether the higher 1.4x magnification will get in the way of that, limiting the lens to truly small critters, and limiting the ability to take capture the occasional larger critter swimming by. Very recently, I even went and got a used MC-11 adapter to try out my old Canon 60mm Macro lens on my A1, as something with a wider applicability than the 90mm for UW photography, though I haven't had a chance to take that combo out diving yet. I expect there will maybe be some vignetting, but that should be fixable in post.
Having said that, I did preorder the new Sony 100mm, but that may get canceled depending on underwater photography reviews of the lens ...Show more →
Did you end up buying the Sony or did you cancel?
I am also shooting underwater and am torn between the Sigma and the Sony.
. 95% of my macro lens use is for underwater photography of small critters. With the 90mm lens' 1.0x magnification, you can still manage to take the occasional photo of larger critters. That's an important aspect, since there's no changing lenses while diving. I'm wondering whether the higher 1.4x magnification will get in the way of that, limiting the lens to truly small critters, and limiting the ability to take capture the occasional larger critter swimming by. Very recently, I even went and