Macro Lens

[klindup]

I am looking to buy a 100mm macro lens, mainly for taking photographs of flowers, but also for head and shoulder portraits.  The reviews that I have read suggest that the Sigma 105mm 2.8 is the one to go for.  The only downside is that it is slower at focusing than the Canon 100mm 2.8.  If that is the only fault then I am not concerned because it is likely that I will be using manual focusing with live view and using a focusing rail, possibly even focus stacking.  Have any members of this group got experience of 100mm macro lenses.  I do not want to buy a lens only to discover that I should have bought a different one.
Ken Lindup

[Bob Atkins]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the Sigma macro. but I'd also look at the Canon 100/2.8 macro if you're concerned about price or the Canon 100/2.8L IS USM macro if you don't mind spending a few more dollars. The new Canon L macro is especially nice since it has multi axis IS with gyros and accelerometers which optimize performance in the macro range by compensating for both translational and rotational camera movement. As far as I know the Sigma just has the normal rotation compensation IS (OS), which is ineffective at close macro distances, though would be useful for handheld portrait work of course.


Canon 100/2.8 USM Macro - $599

Canon 100/2.8L IS USM - $929 after $100 mail-in rebate (price drops when you add it to the shopping cart as it's lower than Canon's Minimum Advertised Price)

Sigma 105/2.8 OS - $669

All three lenses are very sharp especially since you are very likely to be stopped down when shooting macro to get DOF.