Anyone try the Sigma 105mm OS macro? How is it?

Just seeing if Anyone try the Sigma 105mm OS macro? How is it? Does it compare to the canon L?

Not bad for $769 new, go for it. I had the Sigma 150 OS and it was way better.

vsg28 wrote in post #15130384
Not bad for $769 new, go for it. I had the Sigma 150 OS and it was way better.

Which was way better? The 100L, the 105OS, or the 150OS?

I meant the 150 OS was better than the 105 OS in terms of IQ. In fact, nothing can beat the Sigma 150 OS for macro IQ- not even the 180 OS they just released. But for me, the 100 L was way easier to handle in terms of better IS (1 stop), versatility and weight (half the weight) compared to the Sigma 150 OS.

I rented both the Sigma 150 and the Canon 180. The Sigma was better than the Canon 180.

Not surprised, I may pick up a non-OS Sigma 150 if I ever need more reach than what my 100 L will give me. At $500 max used, that is a fantastic deal.

vsg28, thanks for the clarification.

You have used both the 150OS and new 180OS? How close is the 180 to 150 in IS and handling? I don't need a 150 FL, but can use a 180 FL. Is it worth the chunk cash they are asking for it (in your opinion)?

vsg28 wrote in post #15131697
Not surprised, I may pick up a non-OS Sigma 150 if I ever need more reach than what my 100 L will give me. At $500 max used, that is a fantastic deal.

I'm going to put mine up for sale at $550 , so I guess that will leave you out , lol ....

jimewall wrote in post #15131783
vsg28, thanks for the clarification.

You have used both the 150OS and new 180OS? How close is the 180 to 150 in IS and handling? I don't need a 150 FL, but can use a 180 FL. Is it worth the chunk cash they are asking for it (in your opinion)?

Is the 180 OS worth the extra money over the 150 OS? Simply put- No. You gain very little FL but at the cost of much more weight. To keep it at f/2.8, Sigma has massive lens elements in the lens which made it unwieldy for me at least.