Looking to buy a macro lens...

[buthus]

Wasnt sure where to post this, but I figured this is where I have been posting anyway...:?

Looking to buy a macro lens ...probably in the 100mm range. Canon seems to be the obvious choice, but definately more expensive. Reading up on the Sigma 105mm macro vs the Canon 100mm usm macro and I find that the canon beats the sigma in most situations, but some are finding the Sigma better for Macro use. Both have been said to have slow AF, but the Sigma is worse.

Anyone here using the Sigma?

Also looking at the Tamron 90mm. Supposably it is comparable to the canon in everyway except AF and light flare ...not to mention a tighter working distance. Problem is the Tamron is comparable to the Canon in price which makes it not worth considering.


It is a good chunk of money...but I think I would get a lot more enjoyment out of my 20D if I had a decent macro. Besides...my spiders are demanding it!

Would love some experienced input on the subject.

 

[ohturtle]

macro

The sigma 105 is a great lens I used both it and the canon and I liked the sigma more , tamrons 180 macro is the one I use the most the same 1.1 but a lot more working distance the bugs don't seem to like a lens in thier face and it is almost half the price of the canon model in the same area hope this helps

 

[hamfoto]

I've got a 20D and a 100mm macro (Canon) and they work beautifully together. Get the Canon! not for the name...but for the quality.

Chris

 

[Michael Jacobi]

I have no doubt that the Canon and other lenses are higher quality, but I was on a tight budget when I bought my 100 mm macro and bought a Vivitar from B&H for about $130. It came with a 1:1 adapter and I have been happy with it shooting with a Nikon N60. I am buying a Nikon D100 soon and will probably look for a better macro that can get great 1:1 with small true spiders.

Best, Michael

 

[Glen Southern]

I have the Sigma lens and use it with a Canon EOS 350 body. I can't justify upgrading either the body or the lens yet as both are still preforming well for me. I have no issue with the AF at all. I use a ring flash for marco work and although I am still learning I am getting better and better shots. 20D is cool though if I could afford one.

 

[buthus]

Thanks so much for the info.
I ordered the Sigma 105mm just a few minutes ago ...and I'm all wired up thinking about what will come of it.

I really took a lot of time reading up on the three lenses I mentioned above ...comparisons, specs, reviews, etc...
A couple simple things sold me on the Sigma.

Greater working distance ...by far compared to either the Tamron or Canon. Most of my shooting will be thru glass and the subjects must be lit. Working distance is truely a factor here.

Price... though the canon can be had for only $70...maybe $50 more, the lens hood must be also purchased ...another $60 or so. Canon is too cheap to include a hood? ...big reason they lost this sale.

Better macro ...though most comparitive reviews claim the Canon ahead of the Sigma when it comes to overall quality and performance, most give the Sigma the gold when it comes to macro sharpness. I doubt I will use this lens for anything but macro shooting ...and MF at that.

Cant wait to start shooting with this lens. Im going to attempt breeding my treds and I want to document the drama.

I need to get a polarizing filter though. I believe I need a 77mm filter if shooting with the hood?

 

[Tegenaria]

I have a very capable 100 f3.5 macro from Cosina/Vivtar

Comes with a high quality glass screw in accesory lens that takes it to lifesize-its permanently on mine!

I reckon its a bout $100 new, maybe less, and is good enough for most applications!

Some pics taken with it:

Taken at half life size(1:2)