catsanddogs

Hi-
Am interested in getting the 180 mm f3.5 macro lens from Canon. Anyone here have any experience with it? What about the Sigma 180?
Thanks ahead of time for any information you can give me.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

Both are good, but the Tamron 180 is at least as good and only $739 at B&H right now.
I have one and love it. I even use it with a Kenko Pro 300 1.4x for humming birds in the yard.
The AF does sometimes hunt, but when doing macro you are almost always on MF anyway.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

When I was a canon user I owned a Canon 100mm f2.8L IS macro for use with my Canon 70D and 7D mark II. I reckon it's a marvellous lens. I now have a Nikon D500 + a Sigma 180mm f2.8 OS macro (and the matching Sigma 1.4 TC). The Sigma, too, is a brilliant bit of kit, but it is quite heavy and looks like a 400mm. If I had to choose between the Canon 180 macro and the Sigma 180 macro I would take the Sigma because it is a stabilized lens and most of my macro shots are hand held. I also believe it is considerable cheaper than the Canon. I bought a second hand, mint condition copy of the Sigma for £800 and save at least £400 on a brand new copy.

Bob Boner

I have the 180 Canon macro, and the 150 Sigma f/2.8 macro. I think the Sigma might be a hair sharper, but really can't confirm it. Searching on-line suggests that these are the two best macros for the Canon (Naturescapes.net or wwwEJPhoto.com). I much prefer the longer lengths because I frequently photograph insects and the increased focal length keeps me farther away so I don't frighten so many before I capture the image. The narrower angle of the longer focal length also helps make backgrounds less of a problem.

wilfredmike

I owned the Canon 180 and was disapointed with its sharpness. After some research and comparing my Canon to his Sigma, I purchased the Sigma 150. It is much sharper. I sold my Canon and bought the 150 Sigma. The 150 Sigma is suppose to be sharper than the 180 Sigma.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I would definitely get the Sigma if you are going to spend that much money, I own the Canon 180 f/3.5 and it is a fine lens, but the Sigma is newer technology, the Canon was designed in 1996, the Sigma is 1/2 stop faster, and offers image stabilization that when coupled with a 1.4X TC makes the lens a decent but somewhat short telephoto. The image quality of the Canon from what I have read is possibly not as good as the Sigma, I can also tell you that I have owned the older Sigma 180mm f/3.5 Macro, the version before the current version, and the Canon optically is no better than the older Sigma, this is not to say that the Canon is not an excellent lens, it is a fine lens, it is just that it is probably not as good as the new Sigma. If you are new to macro you may want to consider a 100mm lens, they are easier to handle, macro is very fun and rewarding but it is not without its challenges, the longer lenses are more difficult to work with because it is harder to stop motion blur with the longer lenses but they also produce outstanding backgrounds that you can not always create with the shorter lenses. Good luck in whatever you decide.

SKAN Loc: Chennai INDIA

Which Canon body? Please.. I am curious!

catsanddogs

I have a 7D M2 and a 5D M4

SKAN Loc: Chennai INDIA

Thanks for the info!