Sigma 105mm? I have personally never used it but I would much rather have the Canon 10mm based on the specs. The Sigma 105mm has a rotating front element which I don't like since I frequently press the lens onto the glass. It also doesn't have a HSM which means it's going to be louder and slower to focus over Canon's USM or Sigma's HSM. I hear the optics are just fine but I would pay the extra for the Canon.
I set the aperture first, generally between F/8 and F/11, ISO 100 or 200, and let the camera figure out the shutter based on the metering. A tripod and remote shutter release is really important as well.
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=9621818#post9621818 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Blazer88 Sigma 105mm? I have personally never used it but I would much rather have the Canon 10mm based on the specs.
Ah, I see I find the Sigma is very comparable to the Canon 100mm in terms of optics. Both have great IQ but I seem to get more "keepers" with the 150mm over the 100mm. This may have nothing to do with the lens, probably more user error on my part. One thing I love about the Sigma is the tripod ring, very handy! The focal length is great for what I want (the most macro I can get) but it's not easy to get fish shots with it. I would literally have to stand 10 feet from the tank to fit a fish in the whole frame. Not to mention the Sigma is quite a bit larger and heavier. But that's why I also bought the EF-S 60mm F/2.8 macro lens to make up for the bulk of the Sigma. It still took two lenses to come up with something that worked for me better than the Canon 100mm, that should say something about the 100mm
fantastic pics, colors and corals! I absolutely love the skin texture, and the little "flowering" polyps, so gracious and pretty!
amazing lens Blazer! (and your skills makes a lot too of course!!)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.