Which Macro?

Im going to buy a macro, iv made the decision lol... but which one?

My main options i think for now are...

Canon 100mm EF f/2.8 / Sigma 105mm f/2.8 / Sigma 150mm f/2.8


The choice's are mind blowing lol... any advice guys?

Well the 100mm and 105mm are basically the same as far as I know. I'm not sure if there's a clear winner in the Canon/Tamron/Sigma ~100mm macros. It partly depend on how much you wanna pay I guess.

The canon has very slightly better IQ according to reviews, but then negotiable. The 150mm will allow increased working distance

Consider the Tamron 90mm also- it's also very sharp and great in IQ, goes to 1:1, and a bit cheaper, and lighter.

The Canon 100mm does not extend, the Sigma 105mm does (which I would find a pain). The Sigma 150mm does not extend and has HSM - focusing is fast generally, but like all macros the extensive focusing range takes time to cover if you don't use the limiter switch.

I have the 150mm. I almost bought a ~100mm and am very glad I didn't - the 150mm gives a nice working distance for me and the lens has thus far proved to be a very nice lens for other purposes too.

Also make sure you check minimum working distances.

Before you jump on the sigma 150mm check out the price of the sigma 180mm - in the UK at least the 180mm has actually been retailing cheaper than the 150mm for quite a while - and aside from 30mm focal length difference and a little bit heavier there is really not much to tell the two lenses apart. Even when choosing between those two the only rough guide is that 180mm users tend to do more tripod whilst 150mm users tend to do more handheld macro (and honestly either lens works well for hte other use).

Optically speaking you won't see much difference between any of the lenses unless you test in a studio and then sample variation will be a big consideration. In the field it really won't affect you.

Myself I'd say the choice is between the canon 100mm and the sigma 150mm/180mm - the canon from what I hear has the better overall AF performance (for a macro lens) however it is also sold wthout tripod collar or lens hood - the sigma is sold with both and also has a decent (its not lighting fast but you don't tend to find that on any macro lenses) AF in its HSM motor and is far superior to the sigma 105mm.

Overread wrote in post #10170321
Before you jump on the sigma 150mm check out the price of the sigma 180mm - in the UK at least the 180mm has actually been retailing cheaper than the 150mm for quite a while - and aside from 30mm focal length difference and a little bit heavier there is really not much to tell the two lenses apart.

I agree on jumping up to 180 as opposed to the 150.

I had the Tamron 180 and it's a damn fine lens. however it was stolen and I replaced it with the Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro. I slightly miss the added working distance, but I DO NOT miss the weight. That thing was heavy!

Overread wrote in post #10170321
- the canon from what I hear has the better overall AF performance (for a macro lens) however it is also sold wthout tripod collar or lens hood

The 100mm f/2.8L Macro has the hood, as well as IS and weather seal.

However the hood is pretty much useless if you use a lens mounted macro/ring flash.

I just got the Canon Ring Flash for my 100mm and tomorrow the mounting ring will be here for it. I cannot wait! ( I stole the Ring Flash for $100.00 off of Craigs List - yeah it works and I got the original receipt with it! )

Ahh I was thinking that the OP was refering to the original Canon 100mm macro rather than the L edition since the L edition is quite a bit more in cost than the other lenses they list.

Although on a FF... I have the 150. It is faster than the 180 so does a bit better for other purposes. I often use it to shoot portraits or other things such as

Thats a really nice example bohdank, iv been having a good look at the 100L now too, very nice lens, i think iv narrowed my search down to either the Canon 100L or the Sigma 150mm

Love the Canon 100L to bits. It is a portrait lens first and macro second, to me anyway. I used it recently at f22 for macro work without any ill effects. I would have expected diffration would have been in play a lot sooner what what do I know eh? I did stop down to f32 but meh diffraction was an issue then.

bohdank wrote in post #10170873
Although on a FF... I have the 150. It is faster than the 180 so does a bit better for other purposes. I often use it to shoot portraits or other things such as

It's amazing how versatile a good Macro Lens can be, this is a snapshot only ( no setup -drive-by out the window of a moving car ) , taken with the 7D and 100mm L Macro. No PP - out of camera - sized for forum - JPG conversion from RAW.

The Tamron 90mm is worth a try, 2nd hand it's cheap and it's very, very sharp and doubles up as a decent portrait lens

hmm, i dont know... i was gonna go for the tammy a while back and then never did, just wasnt close enough working distance to the subject... but then again i dont know :S