100mm vs 100mm L vs Sigma 105mm {for Macro}

Hi guys!

I was just wondering if any of you have any input about these 3 macro lenses.. I am ready to invest in one and want to know which to get:
1- 100mm f/2.8
2- 100mm f/2.8 L IS
3- Sigma 105mm f/2.8

My body is a 5DII
Main use would be macro shots on newborn baby toes and parts.. And maybe get into flowers and insects macro photography

Thanks in advance!

Unless your budget is tight, you can't go wrong with the Canon 100 L IS, which is simply outstanding on the 5D II.

I've been using the 100mm f/2.8 USM to good effect with my new baby! I can see where IS could come in handy though, so buy what you can afford. An extension tube with your 85mm f/1.8 might be something to think about too. That would be the cheapest option. If you're not really interested in macro photography, that is what I'd do.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/13931652@N00/5​783095481/

loving my 100L

I have been using the 100mm f/2.8 USM (non L) for almost a year. I was concerned about not having IS but it has turned out to be the lens I most like to use when I want to have fun! I cannot say enough about it.

If money is no object get the "L" series but the non "L" is fine. However...if I had a full frame camera like you I would consider the 180mm http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ef_180mm_f_3_5l​_macro_usm

I think it would be better on a full frame.....but again.....you would be happy with the non L. I would forget about the Sigma or Tamron. They are good but the Canon USM motors make a BIG difference. I tried the tamron 90mm f/2.8 first but soon traded it for the Canon. Best thing I ever did. Macro opens up a new world of photography. Have fun!

You don't need anywhere near 1:1 macro for baby photography, but it is honestly hard to get a bad macro lens. They are all among the sharpest lenses, period.

tkbslc wrote in post #12555571
You don't need anywhere near 1:1 macro for baby photography, but it is honestly hard to get a bad macro lens. They are all among the sharpest lenses, period.

This is true, but after having the Tamron 90mm then the Canon 100mm the Canon is noticeably better. That said....I could have easily kept the Tamron 90mm forever. It was sharp, easy to use, and had great color and contrast. The Canon just has better focusing and handling. Also the Canon's USM motor doesn't sound like a "motor" The Tamron was loud. Not going to hurt your IQ but it's nice to have silent focus for 70 USD more. I have never used the Sigma 105mm som I cannot comment on that......and the Canon 180mm would be very cool. I just know it!

nate42nd wrote in post #12555596
......and the Canon 180mm would be very cool. I just know it!

Sigma 150 is where it's at!

Beautiful IQ, HSM focusing, no extending/rotating parts, comes with a hood and tripod collar, and for a good price.

However with that said I would probably choose something a bit shorter. 100mm on a FF should be nice. You wont be at 1:1 mostly anyway, so your working distance should be quite good and will probably give a nicer perspective.

phreeky wrote in post #12555674
Sigma 150 is where it's at!

Beautiful IQ, HSM focusing, no extending/rotating parts, comes with a hood and tripod collar, and for a good price.

However with that said I would probably choose something a bit shorter. 100mm on a FF should be nice. You wont be at 1:1 mostly anyway, so your working distance should be quite good and will probably give a nicer perspective.

Oh yea, the Sigma lenses do have HSM. I don't know about the 105mm but the 150mm would be nice I;m sure. Good point. It is a full frame lens? The OP had a 5Dii.

I had the Canon 100mm f/2.8 non-IS for a year and a half before I bought the Canon 100mm f/2.8L earlier this year. They both have very good IQ, but the 100L's build and IS is worth the extra money if you can afford it.

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick

yes, the Sigma 150 is a DG (for full coverage of APS sized sensors) lens. I love mine but I agree that a 100mm would be more beneficial than 150mm for kids (or parts of them - hopefully still attached ) even on a 5D2

I don't have any of the lenses you're asking about, but do have a 60mm f/2.8. I know you can't use that on your 5DII, but I mention it because I've realized that IS would be very helpful on it, especially for indoor shots in ambient light.

So, if it's in your budget, you might go for the 100mm L.

Jason

There was a thread on this the other day. I've had both the L and non L 100mm. IQ, I can't tell the difference. L feels like it is built better, and it's got IS if you need it.
Can't comment on the Sigma, I had one experience with a lens from them and vowed never to buy another one.

100L!

phreeky wrote in post #12555674
Sigma 150 is where it's at!

Beautiful IQ, HSM focusing, no extending/rotating parts, comes with a hood and tripod collar, and for a good price.

However with that said I would probably choose something a bit shorter. 100mm on a FF should be nice. You wont be at 1:1 mostly anyway, so your working distance should be quite good and will probably give a nicer perspective.

Agreed, I love my 150mm Sigma. Not only can I get closer than I could at 100mm, but the things produces fantastic images.