[Eagle_Friends]

The Sigma 150 2.8 Macro is an exceptional lens, even better than the Sigma 180mm f 3.5. I do not know many people, outside of Pentax Forums, who would rate the D-Fa 100 macro over the Sigma--not sober.

Even comparing it in its own focal range, to say, the Tamron 90mm, the Pentax D-fa 100 Macro loses. For example, read this conclusion from the good folks over @ Photozone:

Verdict
"The Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP is an excellent lens without significant flaws and it is at least as good if not even slightly better than its more expensive native Pentax counterpart. The resolution figures are impressively high, vignetting is marginal and distortions are non-existent. There're hints of lateral and longitudinal CAs but that's nothing out of the ordinary here. The bokeh (out-of-focus blur) is very smooth so the lens is very well suited for shallow depth-of-field situations. The build quality is decent. Taking the moderate pricing into account the Tamron represents an excellent deal."

Sorry to pop your bubble, but photozone was referring to the non-WR 100mm.

Here's the verdict for the DFA 100mm Macro WR from popphoto.

Lens Test: Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro | Photography - PopPhoto.com Offers Camera Reviews and Exclusive Photo Tips

Better than the Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS? According to those guys at least, it does!

[Jewelltrail]

Eagle_Friends:Sorry to pop your bubble, but photozone was referring to the non-WR 100mm.

Here's the verdict for the DFA 100mm Macro WR from popphoto.

Lens Test: Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro | Photography - PopPhoto.com Offers Camera Reviews and Exclusive Photo Tips

Better than the Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS? According to those guys at least, it does!

You couldn't pop a bubble with a running head start--you are not sharp enough. Just because Pentax dressed up the D-fa 100 macro in WR garb, and added more money to the sticker price, doesn't make it any better. Da!!!

a) I am talking Photozone--you are talking Pop who?
b) We are talking Sigma to Pentax comparison--You are talking Canon???

What the PopWho review says is this: " But the autofocus motor is whiny—it could have benefited from Pentax’s Supersonic Drive Motor for smoother and quieter AF" If PopWho knew anything about Pentax, they would know why Pentax did not put SDM in this lens Probably the best thing they did for the lens was to not put SDM in it.


Here are the MTF charts for the Tammy 90 vs the Pentax 100--do I need to post the prices of the 2 lenses?

[Pentaxor]

well, honestly speaking, if only the 150mm was available for the Pentax, we won't hear any of this silly discussion. as far as the Sigma 70 macro is concerned, I don't hear anyone complained about it or claim that it is inferior against the 100mm macros. the only only complain that I hear are mostly from people who don't or haven't actually used the lens. I'd say try the lens first and see how inferior it really is, then we can have a more meaningful discussion.

[sveinmb]

As with all "what macro lens to buy"-discussions: the most important point to decide upon is what focal length you'll need/want. Compare the working distance at 1:1 macro both with and without the hood, and compare the DOF at that distance. I have both the Sigma 180mm and Tamron 90mm. Both give excellent results, but you're a lot closer to your subject with the 90mm and the 180mm will give a lot more washed out backgrounds at the same subject-to-background distance.

Check out this review of the Canon 100mm macro L IS and look at the examples of working distance and DOF vs the 180mm lens: Juza Nature Photography

In fact - all modern macro lenses from Pentax, Sigma and Tamron are great! There is almost no optical difference at all, perhaps with the exception of the Zeiss 100mm f2, said to have the highest resolution of any lens out there. If you really need WR you'll have to go with the Pentax. If you want to shoot subjects that might get scared, or want to isolate your subject as much as possible - get the one with the longest focal length.

[Pentaxor]

As with all "what macro lens to buy"-discussions: the most important point to decide upon is what focal length you'll need/want. Compare the working distance at 1:1 macro both with and without the hood, and compare the DOF at that distance. I have both the Sigma 180mm and Tamron 90mm. Both give excellent results, but you're a lot closer to your subject with the 90mm and the 180mm will give a lot more washed out backgrounds at the same subject-to-background distance.

Check out this review of the Canon 100mm macro L IS and look at the examples of working distance and DOF vs the 180mm lens: Juza Nature Photography

In fact - all modern macro lenses from Pentax, Sigma and Tamron are great! There is almost no optical difference at all, perhaps with the exception of the Zeiss 100mm f2, said to have the highest resolution of any lens out there. If you really need WR you'll have to go with the Pentax. If you want to shoot subjects that might get scared, or want to isolate your subject as much as possible - get the one with the longest focal length.

highest resolution? how about the Pentax A* 200/4 macro? although it is true that all macros are great and are step above regular lenses, the differences among macros are some minute differences in sharpness. resolution power however will vary depending on the optical construct or purpose of the lens where certain exceptions do exists.

[sewebster]

Apparently this new Sigma 150 is also weather resistant.

[olenl]

for macro, sigma is much better:

1. front glass is not retracted so there is more working space (between the lens and the subject), plus sigma is much longer which means even more working space. for macro this is a blessing
2. this also means the built-in flash (or not very big flash on the hot shoe) can be used for macro since the lens bodice won't stand between the flash and the subject. so you won't have to use wireless mode or the flash cord, and can use both hands to hold the camera
3. I am not sure about this but it looks like the sigma is constant length (again I might be wrong) and pentax seem to be elongating for close focus... this means pentax has different focal lengths for different focus distance which I don't like since this means you can't tell the angle of view for any given image... (i might be wrong on this)

however, since sigma 150 for pentax is listed with $1100 price, i doubt these two lenses are directly comparable...

[sewebster]

I think the 150 mm focal length will also give more DOF for the same magnification, along with the more blurred background of (relatively) distant objects. Although this macro DOF stuff is somewhat confusing.

[macTak]

I think the 150 mm focal length will also give more DOF for the same magnification, along with the more blurred background of (relatively) distant objects. Although this macro DOF stuff is somewhat confusing.

No, it will not give give more DOF for the same magnification (this stays pretty close to constant). However, because of the focal length the background often gets more blurred as the background is composed of further-away objects (or the close objects are enlarged, making the background appear less busy)