Advice needed on Sigma Macro Lens: Now that I'm retired, I would like to get back to shooting flowers. I found that B & H has the Sigma 105 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM with an instant rebate of...

02Nomad Loc: Catonsville, MD

Now that I'm retired, I would like to get back to shooting flowers. I found that B & H has the Sigma 105 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM with an instant rebate of $300.00, making the price just $699.00. I'm sure there are some on UHH that have used this lens, I am asking for guidance from anyone that has this lens. Is it worth the price? Are there any negatives that I should be aware of?

Thanking all for your input.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

I can't comment on the 105 mm Sigma macro. I use the Nikon 105 mm and I love it.

However, I do use the Sigma 180mm lens and I have to tell you it's the best macro lens I've ever had (I presently have five macro lenses). The only problem is the weight and also the filter diameter (86) mm. That means I can't attach my ring flash or my Nikon macro flash on the front of the lens.

I'm thinking of getting the Sigma 150 mm lens in addition since it has a more reasonable filter size that allows me to use my flashes. I've not done this yet but I'm hoping that this lens is as good as the 180mm.

On a hunch the 105 mm is probably a good choice as well. Hopefully someone will respond to you. It certainly would have a good working distance, I've used my 105 for years both on a crop sensor and a full frame one. I eventually wen to the longer one because I tend to shoot insects and this gave me a chance to get even further back.

mtparker Loc: Cape Charles & Springfield, Virginia

02Nomad wrote:

Now that I'm retired, I would like to get back to shooting flowers. I found that B & H has the Sigma 105 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM with an instant rebate of $300.00, making the price just $699.00. I'm sure there are some on UHH that have used this lens, I am asking for guidance from anyone that has this lens. Is it worth the price? Are there any negatives that I should be aware of?

Thanking all for your input.

Sigma EX 105mm f2.8 HSM OS (1:1)
Close Focus 12.3
L-W 3.1x5.0
Weight 25.6oz
Filter 62mm
9 Blades

I have all the Sigma macro primes. I acquired this lens about the time it was released but never owned its non-OS predecessor. I find the 105 to be another outstanding macro lenses. This lens stacks up to and bests the micro-Nikkor 105 VR and, at the current discount Sigma is offering, it is a good choice and a great value in this focal range. Resolution is superb, but borders could be better. Bokeh is excellent with a few hard edges noticed from time to time. I see a bit of vignetting in this lens wide open. Image stabilization (OS) is very good. As you approach macro (1:1) it is not as effective (to be expected) due to the angular shake. Among the best of the 100-105 macros available and very very good. Highly recommended.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

From what I have seen, everyone gets very good results with any of the Sigma, Tamron, Nikon, Canon, Tokina 90-105 macro lenses.
They are all good.
Seems to be a bit of a "sweet spot" in lens design.
Maybe it is just because I like the subject matter and viewpoint, but I do not think you can make a bad choice here.
You will be happy with whatever you buy.

mtparker Loc: Cape Charles & Springfield, Virginia

I've found that Sigma designs seem to have created a set of macro primes that are not only outstanding macro lenses, but superb general purpose lenses as well, not generally true of macro lenses. The 150 and 180 are excellent with the Sigma 1.4X teleconverter too.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

The Sigma 105-mm macro is an EXCELLENT lens. I use a Nikkor 105G macro lens, but If I had to replace it, I would purchase a Sigma macro lens. I love the 3-position focus restriction switch.

(Download)

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

I have the Sigma 105 and 150 and wouldn't part with either one of them. I also have the Tamron 180 which is an excellent lens but, hardly use it since I got the Sigma lenses.

All the images on my flickr page are taken with the 150 or 105 on the D3200/D7100 and D800e. A few in the beginning were done with the Tamron 180.

I still consider myself a newbie and the Sigma lenses make me look pretty good.

The 90-105mm range is perfect to start with. You will never regret getting the 105. It's also perfect for portraits and anything else you care to shoot.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

mtparker wrote:

Sigma EX 105mm f2.8 HSM OS (1:1)
Close Focus 12.3
L-W 3.1x5.0
Weight 25.6oz
Filter 62mm
9 Blades

If you are referring to MFD (minimum focus distance) for 1:1, it's more like...

105 about 6"
150 about 9"
180 about 11"

Baz Loc: Peterborough UK

I use both Sigma and Tamron macro lenses. Tamron 90mm & Sigma 150mm. Both are excellent. The only point I would make is that the longer the focal length, the more issues become magnified. I tend to shoot handheld, and I get a higher hit rate with the shorter focal length. Logical of course, but often overlooked. Maybe it is time I started to force myself to use a tripod, but that would mean a change of style, and would I be happy with that ?

mldavis2

Your macro focal length should be chosen depending on what you want to shoot. The 50mm requires you to be rather close to your subject. That may work for flowers, but for filling the frame with an insect (for example) you'll find it will frighten away your target before you can get the shot. So the 105 or 150 may be a better but much more expensive choice.

As an aside, I often obtain excellent shots of insects using a long telephoto (Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6) which enables me to remain far enough away that I don't spook the subject. I've gotten many shots with it that you could never get with a macro.

The main attraction of a macro lens is the flat field of view as much as the ability to close-focus.

Baz Loc: Peterborough UK

I too have used the telephoto plus tubes method, using a Sigma 150 - 500mm for taking dragonflies that would otherwise be unreachable. It works well, and of course for many years was the only way us lesser mortals could afford to go macro.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I have the Sigma 180mm macro and use the Nikon macro close up R1C1 with it, I had to buy a step down ring that goes from 86mm to 77mm to use this system. I don't see any loss on IQ with this setup. The 180mm is great for shooting insects as you don't have to be close and disturb them.

Bugfan wrote:

I can't comment on the 105 mm Sigma macro. I use t... (show quote)

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

02Nomad wrote:

Now that I'm retired, I would like to get back to shooting flowers. I found that B & H has the Sigma 105 f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM with an instant rebate of $300.00, making the price just $699.00. I'm sure there are some on UHH that have used this lens, I am asking for guidance from anyone that has this lens. Is it worth the price? Are there any negatives that I should be aware of?

Thanking all for your input.

I have owned the Sigma 180mm Macro lens and it was every bit as good as the Canon, I currently own the 150mm OS lens and it is a great lens, but if I were to buy one at this particular moment I would purchase the Venus that was just reviewed by Shanhan. The lens is manual focus but that is fine for Macro because most serious macro shooters don't use auto focus, and the lens will achieve 2:1 magnification which is twice as close as a normal macro lens. It is the only extreme macro lens that will achieve infinity focus, in fact the only other extreme macro lens I know of will only focus about 6" in front of the lens, it can not be used for any other type of photography, that would be the Canon MP-E 65. The Venus retails for under $400.

BTW, OS is pretty much ineffective when shooting Macro.

Here is Shanhan's review followed by the Venus website.

http://www.slrlounge.com/review-venus-v-dx-60mm-f2-8-21-ultra-macro-lens-thomas-shahan/

http://www.venuslens.net/

mtparker Loc: Cape Charles & Springfield, Virginia

Flyextreme wrote:

If you are referring to MFD (minimum focus distance) for 1:1, it's more like...

105 about 6"
150 about 9"
180 about 11"

MFD refers to the distance from the front element to the film plane/sensor. Pretty sure you refer to the subject to lens distance in your post here, which is useful.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Unfortunately I have to shoot in auto focus as my eyes are not good enough for manual focus.

Blurryeyed wrote:

I have owned the Sigma 180mm Macro lens and it was... (show quote)