harleridr Loc: S.Texas

I have the Nikon version and love the lens the two piece lens shade takes a little getting used to. This lens is also internal focusing.
Harle

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Most people shoot macro from a tripod for all the obviuos reasons. Why would Vibration Control be an issue? In fact most manufacturers suggest to turn it off when on a tripod to prevent it from false searching. If you're using it for portraits I understand but not macro.

Ron Dial Loc: Cuenca, Ecuador

yes, I have a Sigma 105mm Macro lens. Love it. It has a focus travel limiter so it doesn't go in and out for the entire focal plane of the lense. Great lense. I even have super macro lenses that go on the front of the lense for micro shots.

marty wild Loc: England

You will have to get your head around focus stacking all macro glass isolate a small area if you want to get to magazine standard

josquin1 Loc: Massachusetts

I have one and use it on my Canon 80D and it is very good. I have not had focus issues with it and I am also very pleased with its optical stabilization. Maybe a little on the heavy side but the price is really good. Go with it as you cannot really beat the price.

ronf78155 Loc: Seguin Texas

After researching for months I went with the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro . Awesome lens and I find myself using it more then I ever thought I would....it's a great portrait lens

sippyjug104 Loc: Missouri

I agree with Bob Boner that longer is better for the field. I also own several Sigma full-frame lenses and I enjoy them. I have a Laowa 60mm f2.8 2:1 macro, a Lester Dine 105mm f2.8 1:1 macro and a Nikon 200mm f4 1:1 macro and I use them all. I use the 60mm and the 105mm for indoors non-moving subjects and flowers. I also use them as prime lenses for general photography due to their image and color quality. I found the 200mm to be best in the field for critters because I can get more shots without them moving or flying away.

Because the depth of field is so razor-thin, you will need to take many photos of the subject to get just one that is pinpoint sharp. It's amazing how much even your heartbeat makes the camera shake and the "focus dot" will bounce around in your viewfinder like lottery balls in the Powerball Drawing. Here's a Robberfly that I took this morning to give you an idea of why longer is better.

(Download)

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

For Canon users the 100-400mm MII at 400mm is a good option for bugs.
Here is one at about 3' with a slight amount of cropping for straighten the view for it.
Great resolution with an old 7D with only 18 mp, half or less than many in use now.

(Download)

Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga

I have an older one in Nikon mount but seldom use it as it is an AF lens. I use even older manual focus macro lenses for my macro shooting as both AF & vibration reduction are of little value when shooting life size. Now if I didn't have other lenses to take care of other scenarios (like portraiture), I might have used it more. Really, you can't go wrong with any "true" macro lens. They all deliver as long as your technique is good. The major differences will be in build quality & additional features (like AF, VR, IF and focus stops). Yes, some may rate better on bench testing, but real world shooting is a different animal. Few, if any, can duplicate bench test results...

no nameJoe

I ha ve the 105 sigma macro it does the job for me but I have not used the nikon so I could compare it however I am just a hobbist not a pro doing research so my degree of satisfaction is just for me no client to satisfy I paid about $ 540 about a year ago, I understand that Sigma is coming out with a new version I don't know what the prize for the new one will be

no nameJoe