Would you.. (macro lens)

Would you swap a sigma 105mm F2.8 EX macro lens for a Canon EF 100mm F2.8 Macro lens?

I have the sigma but often wondered about the canon.. I am quite happy with the sigma but I just wanted to get some views ?

??? No. Why would you? Especially if you're happy with it? That would mean that you want the Canon just becuase it's a Canon?

Mr. Clean wrote in post #2107281
??? No. Why would you? Especially if you're happy with it? That would mean that you want the Canon just becuase it's a Canon?

Yeah right. Sounds like your making me out to some sort of Canon freak....

Nah I am happy. Just curious if anyone would.

Maybe because you want USM? Personally I don't think there'd be enough reason to do this.

In some tests I've seen the Canon placed just slightly above the Sigmain IQ, build quality, and features but I don't think it's worth the cost to get rid of the Sigma for the Canon. But keep in mind, this is comparing an excellent lens, to an excellent lens. It's like debating which is better, a Lamborghini or a Ferrari?

HOWEVER Keep in mind I haven't used the Sigma (yet) personally. I just purchased one and hopefully it'll be here tomorrow. As for the Canon I've been using one on loan from my friend for quite some time, and to me the USM is not that big of an advantage as I'm almost always focusing manually. I only use the lens for macro work, no portraits or anything.

If you're happy with your lens there is little reason to replace it.

On the other hand, Extending front elements are annoying and Canon's faster USM with full-time manual focus comes in quite handy in my opinion.

I had the sigma loved the optics hated the noise the slow AF and the extending parts so bought the canon which has been great and after this last year of outdoor macro work aswell as taking lots of adder pictures i added the sigma 150 to go along side the canon i just wish the sigma 180 was as good as the 150

I'd take the Lamborghini

Get the canon ,you will not be disapointed. better resale

I like my sigma. But yes my only issue with it is the extending focus.. The slow AF and noise isnt an issue.

Yeah, I'd swap it. I don't like the fact that the sigma (and all others except the canon) extend when they focus. That and: 1) the FT manual focus ability (I think its passe to have to flip switches, etc.), 2: The USM (my 100mm macro does lots of double duty, macro & non); 3) The excellent build quality, are all reasons that, for me, the canon is the superior lens.

fstop11.net wrote in post #2107213
Would you swap a sigma 105mm F2.8 EX macro lens for a Canon EF 100mm F2.8 Macro lens?

If somehow I found myself in the position of having that option, then yes. BTW, I do have the Canon macro.

Never shot with the Canon, but owned a sigma and loved it. never once did wish I had bought the canon. Sold it for the Sigma 150mm macro, which I will be purchasing as soon as the winter is over and the bugs come back.

Focus isnt an issue with me since I only use manual focus for macro.

keep the sigma..The IQ is probably the same
The only real difference is the USM and non moving or extending front...If I already had the Sigma I wouldnt spend the more oney. USM probably isnt that big deal since MF is used ALOT in macro anyway

I've got the Sigma 105 and love it. As many others have said, I use MF in macro anyway so the USM of the Canon 100 is mute. If you love it then hang on to it.

I notice the comments about AF not being a valid point to consider when shooting macro. Perhaps this is so. However, I would venture a guess that you (as with me) use the lens for more than macro. True, you do have 100mm covered with your 100-400L but I would think a lens of 100mm focal length weighing less the half the weight of your 'L' and being something over twice as fast would find it's way to being used for more than just macro with you. In that case, USM is a valid consideration.