Macro: 100 2.8, 105 2.8, or 150 2.8

want to get into macro stuff, but i am a little confused about which lens i want to get. the Canon 100 2.8, Sigma 105 2.8, or the Sigma 150 2.8?
im a total noob to macro so i need some help here. which lens would be best for bugs and close up detail? or could you suggest a better macro lens?
thanks

For bugs, I'd recommend the Sigma 150. It gives you a bit more working distance, which can be crucial for bugs.

It's hard to get a better macro lens than the Sigma 150 or Canon 100, they're both exceptional. The Sigma 105 is just as good optically, but it doesn't have the autofocus that the other two do (it's loud and scratchy). That's not a problem for macro, but may be important to you.

Jman13 wrote in post #5969948
For bugs, I'd recommend the Sigma 150. It gives you a bit more working distance, which can be crucial for bugs.

It's hard to get a better macro lens than the Sigma 150 or Canon 100, they're both exceptional. The Sigma 105 is just as good optically, but it doesn't have the autofocus that the other two do (it's loud and scratchy). That's not a problem for macro, but may be important to you.

ya thats kinda hat i was thinking. the more the reach the better.
regarding the 105, ive heard about the slow AF, it wouldnt be that much of a deal unless the bug was about to fly away. haha

Well, I tend to use manual focus for macro anyway, so the slow AF is only a factor if you are using it for things other than macro. I have the 105 as well (I'm actually going to be selling it here soon), and it's an excellent lens for macro use, it just doesn't have the silent and quick AF that the 150 or the Canon 100 has.

Jman13 wrote in post #5970137
Well, I tend to use manual focus for macro anyway, so the slow AF is only a factor if you are using it for things other than macro. I have the 105 as well (I'm actually going to be selling it here soon), and it's an excellent lens for macro use, it just doesn't have the silent and quick AF that the 150 or the Canon 100 has.

o rreally?
ok well i will have other lens in the area so it willbe a macro only lens.
when u sell PM me about it, i will probably pick it up form ya :P

i like the macro lenses with no barrel extension, like the canon 60mm, 100mm, sigma 150mm, and all the 180mms. but having said that, any macro lens is basically sharp and quite a bit depends on your working distance and all.

i'd say for the little more money, get the sigma 150mm which comes with a hood and tripod mount already - much more useful. (unless of course, you're willing to pay more for those accessories with the canon).

Greetings - I use the Canon 180L macro and love it and its use as kind of a 'prime' is also useful. With distance from subject important in order to catch things by surprise, I like that flexibility. I have the 50 compact macro too, but find myself reaching for the 180 outside and the 50 inside for fixed subjects.
Cheers,
John

ooo how id ove to get a L macro.
however my funds dont like those red little L's
i think i might get the 150mm but not until septemeber, so i have some time to think.

I have owned two Sigma 150s and have sold both of them. They are superb lenses. I would not hesitate to recommend either one. I have been using the Canon 100mm macro. I find myself liking the 100mm a bit more. Its very easy to use. The working distance is great. You cant go wrong with either. Im leaning more towards the Canon due to the fact that its a bit lighter. Thats always a plus with me.

I decided to jump in to Macro recently and I didn't know what lens to get so I started asking around and poking around.

During my research I happened upon this thread over in the Macro Section asking which Macro Lens people use and I was surprised to see that the Canon 100mm f/2.8 was the overwhelming leader with over 53% of the votes with the next closest being the Canon 60mm f/2.8 with a little over 12% of the votes.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=160960

Based on this I picked one up used and love it.

At the same time I can't disagree with the comment about the 180's extra reach and don't think you will really go wrong with either of them.

I hate that poll. The only reason the 100mm macro has 53% of the vote is because it has Canon on the side, and it's a good length. YES, the Canon 100 is a fantastic lens, it probably the best choice for many people for general macro photography, but it does not mean it is the best macro lens, nor the best for certain situations. I'm not dissing the 100, nor am I saying if the 100mm length is right for you, that you SHOULDN'T get the 100 macro. But I think that getting it simply because more people on this board have it than other lenses is not the reason to buy a lens.

IF you need internal focusing, AND the 100mm length, AND USM, it's the best bet. If you only need the 100mm length, you should probably save a few $$ and pick up a Tamron 90, Sigma 105 or Tokina 100. If you need a more compact lens, that's full frame compatible, get the Sigma 70. If you need a compact lens, and you DON'T need full frame, the Canon 60 is a good bet. If you are shooting a lot of insects, or need more working distance, the Sigma 150mm is a fantastic bet. If you need even more working distance, the Canon 180, Sigma 180, or Tamron 180 all will do the job.

I.E....pick the lens based on your needs, not on popularity. The lens most people probably own on this board is the 18-55...it doesn't mean it's the best.

^^^^ +1

Jman13 wrote in post #5973984
I hate that poll. The only reason the 100mm macro has 53% of the vote is because it has Canon on the side, and it's a good length. YES, the Canon 100 is a fantastic lens, it probably the best choice for many people for general macro photography, but it does not mean it is the best macro lens, nor the best for certain situations. I'm not dissing the 100, nor am I saying if the 100mm length is right for you, that you SHOULDN'T get the 100 macro. But I think that getting it simply because more people on this board have it than other lenses is not the reason to buy a lens.

IF you need internal focusing, AND the 100mm length, AND USM, it's the best bet. If you only need the 100mm length, you should probably save a few $$ and pick up a Tamron 90, Sigma 105 or Tokina 100. If you need a more compact lens, that's full frame compatible, get the Sigma 70. If you need a compact lens, and you DON'T need full frame, the Canon 60 is a good bet. If you are shooting a lot of insects, or need more working distance, the Sigma 150mm is a fantastic bet. If you need even more working distance, the Canon 180, Sigma 180, or Tamron 180 all will do the job.

I.E....pick the lens based on your needs, not on popularity. The lens most people probably own on this board is the 18-55...it doesn't mean it's the best.

Very well stated!

Another thing to remember is that the Sigma comes with a hood and tripod foot, making it a better buy IMO. I wanted one but settled for the Canon 100 which was a great lens. I just had to sell it to fund other things.

ya thats what i was thinking
the tripod mount would really help.
thanks guys