New model Sigma 150 macro better than the older model ??

I am in the market for a macro lens and would like to hear opinions on the difference between the older Sigma 150 macro and the newer OS model.
I used to own the older model and found it to be very sharp. Is the newer model worth the extra cost compared to a secondhand older model? Also, how does the sigma compare to the canon 100L macro?
I shoot with a 6D, many thanks.

If you post this in the macro forum, you will get more answers.

don1163 wrote in post #18068686
I am in the market for a macro lens and would like to hear opinions on the difference between the older Sigma 150 macro and the newer OS model.
I used to own the older model and found it to be very sharp. Is the newer model worth the extra cost compared to a secondhand older model? Also, how does the sigma compare to the canon 100L macro?
I shoot with a 6D, many thanks.

I did a lot of reading last year before buying my EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro (non-IS, non-L) lens. The Sigma OS is second only to the Canon L. One advantage the Sigma has is 150mm, which delivers more working distance. That is handy if you shoot live things. I settled on the less expensive, non-L Canon because I don't do much macro/close-up work, and the price was less than 1/2 of the Canon L, and Sigma OS lenses. Just my readings. Please do your own homework. Hope this helps a bit.

I have the non-OS version. When the OS version came out, I considered it. Pop Photo test had the new version not quite as sharp as the old. The answer is really do you have a need for the OS. I usually use a tripod and remote release when using the lens, so I really don't. But when I use it without the tripod, there are times when I believe the OS would certainly be helpful. So it depends on under what conditions you will use the lens. Hand-held close-ups in low light, definitely OS. Otherwise, it is probably not worth the extra expense.

IS is not required for macro. DOF is such that a tripod is best that IS, and AF to some extent, is then surplus to requirements. If you intend to shoot other subjects eg portraits where you may well hand-hold then IS is useful, however you do have to pay extra for it.

I have often read about this tripod macro technique but the bugs never seem to want to fly or walk into the 1:1 focus plane once I have it set up.

FEChariot wrote in post #18070469
I have often read about this tripod macro technique but the bugs never seem to want to fly or walk into the 1:1 focus plane once I have it set up.

Then you need that extra little bit of patience. If you're taking pics in your garden then planting the best bug-attracting shrubs/flowers helps.

oingyboingybob wrote in post #18070479
Then you need that extra little bit of patience. If you're taking pics in your garden then planting the best bug-attracting shrubs/flowers helps.

There is patience and then there is just wasting your time. At peak pollination times of a few flowering ground cover plants I have, I might get a few hundred bees and I still wouldn't just wait for one to fly into the focus plane: Going to do that hand held.

FEChariot wrote in post #18072520
There is patience and then there is just wasting your time. At peak pollination times of a few flowering ground cover plants I have, I might get a few hundred bees and I still wouldn't just wait for one to fly into the focus plane: Going to do that hand held.

Whatever.