Sigma 105mm vs. 150mm macro lenses

<p>Hi,<br>

I'm having a macro Sigma 105mm f2.8. Two things that I don't like about this lens: 1) noisy and slow in focus (although with f2.8). 2) During focusing process, the inner tube keeps getting in & out (I believe that makes it slow & noisy).</p>

<p>Now, I'm thinking about changing to Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro lens. So my question to you is that does this 150mm lens have the above two things that I mentioned above? Thanks.</p>

<p>Still slow but not as noisy.<br>

<a href="http://www.lenstip.com/313.10-Lens_review-Sigma_150_mm_f_2.8_APO_EX_DG_OS_HSM_Macro_Autofocus.html">http://www.lenstip.com/313.10-Lens_review-Sigma_150_mm_f_2.8_APO_EX_DG_OS_HSM_Macro_Autofocus.html</a></p>

<p> </p>

<p>I have no experience with these lenses but my 100/2.8 IS suffers none of the above. It's a superb lens in all accounts. HTH.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br />Yakim.</p>

My thoughts on my 100/2.8 IS are exactly the same as Yakim's. I don't go anywhere without this lens, my

favorite.

<p>All of my macro lenses have been Canons, so I can't answer the specific question. However, I would not choose a macro lens this way. I would start by deciding what focal length is best for my particular use, and then look among competing lenses with that focal length.</p>

I have read of complains of the 100/2.8 IS taking forever to focus. However, this is not the case. It certainly

can't focus fast from infinity, say to 3/4 life size. You need to get the focus somewhat close to begin with.

Surprisingly, with my 40D body, I can us AI Servo and it will focus fast enough to compensate for the my

movements and the movements of the butterflies I am trying to photograph.

 

So possibly the Sigma will focus quickly if you are in the ballpark to begin with.

 

I agree with with what Dan M says about the correct focal length. For me, the 100 is the ideal length for

butterflies, frogs, flowers etc. If I were to photograph something like a trail sign, I would have to back up to

far so switch to a shorter lens. I find it the ideal length for photographing snakes. The 60 would be t oo

close for rattlesnakes.

<p>The Sigma 70/2.8 macro is pretty funky about focusing, but I like the focal length and it's sharp on the 5D2. The Zeiss 100/2.0 semi-macro (only goes to 1:2) also looks interesting as a 100mm macro. No AF and no 1:1 vs. amazing corner to corner sharpness even wide open.</p>

<p>When talking about focusing speed I was relating to other 1:1 macro lenses.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>Any macro, with its incredibly shallow depth of field at 1:1 or close to it, will 'seek'. But there's no way short of chance that the AF will choose the particular part that YOU want in focus. The Tamron 90mm has a focus-seeking limit knob, as I suppose some others do. It helps, but manual focus is the thing once you get it close.<br>

I don't think the 150mm will be any better in regard to your problems, but it will give you a little better working distance, for a price.</p>

<p>the EF 100mm L has a focus limiting switch, but it is a pricey lens.</p>