Any reports on the new Sigma MACRO 70mm F2.8 EX DG

I'm looking for Macro for my 350 Rebel/30D and see that Sigma has a new 70mm
Macro F2.8 EX DG. Can anyone report on this lens? It's this or the Canon
EFS 60mm F2.8. Any comments on the two would be appreciated.

Thanks

Eugene

 

Why not the Canon 50/2.5 macro or 100/2.8 macro?

http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr

 

Perhaps he would like to make an informed choice?

 

I have the Canon EF-S 60mm F/2.8 USM and it is a very nice lens. The front
element neither rotates nor extends during focussing either and the focus
ring doesn't turn during focusing either so there are no visible moving
parts to scare away your subjects. This is a nice feature. The lens is
also quite light (335g) and small and can be stopped down to F/32. As usual
Canon does not supply the hood and it is a pricey extra although it is a
good one. The focusing is a bit slow which is needed for macro distances,
but there is not a switch for focus limiting although it can be switched to
manual with focus confirmation. There is also full time manual focus in
auto mode. It has a metal lens mount and seems to be fairly well built and
it takes inexpensive 52mm filters.

If you are considering the Sigma 70mm, then why not the Sigma 50 macro or
the 105 macro? Both of those are less expensive than the 70 and they both
reach 1:1 and both stop down 2 stops further (F/45) than the 70 (F/22) for
more depth of field when that is more important than absolute sharpness.
The 50 and 105 do extend during focusing although they don't rotate. I do
not know about the 70mm and Sigma doesn't say on their website. Sigma also
makes a 150 and 180 macro but these are much more expensive. Sigma does
include a threaded hood and has a focus limiter. The 70mm is also 525 grams
and is not a full frame image like the Sigma 50 and 105. The 70 also takes
larger and more expensive 62mm filters than the 50 and 105 which take 55 and
58mm filters respectively.

Both the Sigma 50 and 105mm macro lenses are lighter, smaller, cheaper,
cheaper for filters, produce a full size image circle, stop down further and
are fairly well regarded. What is the possible draw to the 70mm lens over
the previous offerings unless you really need that particular viewing angle?

Personally, I would watch for a good deal somewhere or even used on a Canon
100mm macro although I am very pleased with the 60mm and do not plan on
replacing it.

 

I have the Canon EF-S 60mm F/2.8 USM and it is a very nice lens. The front
element neither rotates nor extends during focusing either and the focus
ring doesn't turn during focusing either so there are no visible moving
parts to scare away your subjects. This is a nice feature. The lens is
also quite light (335g) and small and can be stopped down to F/32. As usual
Canon does not supply the hood and it is a pricey extra although it is a
good one. The focusing is a bit slow which is needed for macro distances,
but there is not a switch for focus limiting although it can be switched to
manual with focus confirmation. There is also full time manual focus in
auto mode. It has a metal lens mount and seems to be fairly well built and
it takes inexpensive 52mm filters.

If you are considering the Sigma 70mm, then why not the Sigma 50 macro or
the 105 macro? Both of those are less expensive than the 70 and they both
reach 1:1 and both stop down 2 stops further (F/45) than the 70 (F/22) for
more depth of field when that is more important than absolute sharpness.
The 50 and 105 do extend during focusing although they don't rotate. I do
not know about the 70mm and Sigma doesn't say on their website. Sigma also
makes a 150 and 180 macro but these are much more expensive. Sigma does
include a threaded hood and has a focus limiter. The 70mm is also 525 grams
which is quite a bit for a small lens. The 70mm lens also takes larger and
more expensive 62mm filters than the 50 and 105 which take 55 and 58mm
filters respectively.

Both the Sigma 50 and 105mm macro lenses are lighter, smaller, cheaper,
cheaper for filters, stop down further and are fairly well regarded. What
is the possible draw to the 70mm lens over the previous offerings unless you
really need that particular viewing angle?

I had said in a previous post that the 70mm lens is not full frame, this is
wrong, the 70 is full frame, but I am do not know what makes it better than
the 50 or 105 to justify being more expensive than either of them.

Personally, I would watch for a good deal somewhere or even used on a Canon
100mm macro although I am very pleased with the 60mm and do not plan on
replacing it.

 

Comparing Sigma's MTF charts for the 50, 70, and 105mm macros, it appears
that the new 70mm is a little bit better than the other two which may
justify the increased cost although they all look pretty good. If it had
other modern features like no external moving parts, then even more so, but
I cannot find a review to say if that is the case or not.

 

Thanks for all the information.

One of the reasons I was looking at the 60-70 mm Macro lenses was the fact
that I could also use it as a portrait lens, so with a multiplication factor
of about 1.5, I'd be in the 90 - 105 range. I looked at the Sigma 50mm and
really liked the price, but for reasons about, I was thinking about the 60
or 70mm.

I'll probably go with the Canon (I already have 3 other EFS lenses). I like
everything about the lens. The Sigma option appealed to be because my
daughter has a film Elan 7 Canon and she'd be able to use the Sigma Macro on
the Elan. In reality though, if she really wanted to shoot some Macro -
she'd probably end up taking one of my cameras and then tell me about it
after. LOL

Thanks again for all the input.

Eugene

 

Because the 70 becomes a 105 on most digital cameras, and many consider
105 the perfect head and shoulders portrait lens.

 

On full frame, I think 85mm is good for "normal" portrait, 135mm for
tight portrait, and 50mm for environmental portrait. Most manufacturers
(except Canon) don't have a portrait lens around 100mm (only macro
around 100mm), but they all have portrait lenses at 85mm and 135mm.

http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr

 

I've used my EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro on my Canon Elan IIe camera. It works
fine mounted on a Canon EF25 II extension tube and with the extension tube
has a large enough image circle to cover the 35mm frame. This of course
loses infinity focus and allows even closer focussing. Magnification varies
from 1.61 to 0.44 with a 25mm tube across the focusing range according to
Canon. Even set to infinity you are very close to the subject. Autofocus
and the aperture and everything work fine.

I don't have an EF12 II tube to test with so although it would mount, I
don't know if the image circle is big enough to cover full frame at only
12mm extension. With a 12mm tube, the magnification would be 1.28 to 0.20
which would give more of a working range with a film camera. By just
holding the lens in front of the camera, I see corner darkening at about 4mm
that is as close as I can get. At 12mm it seems to be not visible in the
viewfinder.

So you could use the EF-S 60mm for macro photography on her Elan 7, just not
normal photography. Only the II versions of the Canon extension tubes fit
both EF-S and EF lenses however.

 

Those of us with Nikon F's in our background are fully aware of the
delights of the 105 Nikkor...

 

I had a chance to do an in-store comparison between the Sigma 70mm Macro and
the Canon EF-S 60mm. The Sigma was bigger and a bit heavier which gave it a
real solid feel. The front lens also moves during focusing (quite a bit,
actually) and I can see where this may be a bit of a distraction while
shooting portraits. I tried the AF on various items and found that the
Canon did a lot more searching than the Sigma. I felt that the Sigma lens
would focus quicker than the Canon. Sigma also comes with a lens hood and
carrying case.

Eugene