Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-10-2014, 08:06 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Comments on the Sigma f:2.8, 105mm macro lens

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.


I've wrung just about every ounce of sharpness I can get out of MY third-party lenses. I have a Vivitar 80-200mm lens that I consider extremely sharp. You have seen some of my posts using it. I have a Sigma 28-80mm 1:2 macro (close focus?) lens that is also very sharp. I have used a reversing ring with a SMC Pentax f:1.4, 50mm lens that gave me what I consider "exceptional" sharpness and color saturation with at least 1:1 magnification. I have a 28mm Sears macro that has turned in results that has garnered some very high praise. But.... nothing I've ever accomplished even comes close to the absolutely incredible images I see posted here by members using the brand-name, high-end, dedicated macro lenses. Eaglem's flower photos are mind-boggling! But, as hard as I try, I can't hold a candle for him to trip his shutter by! The same with some of the images mtux posts as well as many others. You simply cannot produce images like that with the lenses I'm using. Impossible!


It's obvious to me that the lenses I have.... as good as they might be.... are what they are. I think I have done well with them. I think I have pushed them to their maximum potential, which ain't half bad, sometimes. But, I'm ready to move on and move up. I would like to have one of every GOOD, dedicated macro lens on earth, but I will consider myself a lucky man if I end up with only one. So, I'm on a mission to investigate what's available, what the pros and cons are of each and which one will give me the biggest bang for my buck.


I'm not a wealthy man and money is a factor in just about every facet of my life. I'm single, live alone and have a fixed income. But, I'm determined to have one of the lenses that will allow me to no longer carry the jock-straps of those who post these magnificent images! (No offense meant, gays/gals!)


I have physical limitations that preclude me from getting down on my knees to get close to my subject, so most of my photography will be either standing up... or, bending over for short periods of time. Also, I do a lot of desk-top shooting if I can bring my subject indoors. I like photographing flowers and weeds and stuff like that. I'm not into the incredibly close-up photos of fly's eyes, so, I don't need a lens that will produce almost microscopic enlargement. Also, I'd like to do some bird photography, but I think to expect a lens to be capable of doing both high-end, quality macro shots AND get the knife-edge sharpness of some of the bird photos is nothing more than a pipe dream. I've got a Pentax-K, f:5.6, 400mm that will do for now. The birds can wait!


So.... back to the original question in the thread title: Comments or opinions please on the Sigma f:2.8, 105mm macro lens. How does it stack up against the Pentax line of dedicated macros.... for instance, the 100mm that I asked about a couple of days ago? If one is better than the other, why so? How about focal length? Which will allow me to stand off at a reasonable distance and still get the images I seek?


Thanks for your patience.

12-10-2014, 08:33 PM   #2
Veteran Member
old4570's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,551
I think its not just the lens :
But rather the combination of lens and camera ..
As near as I can tell so far , my Tamron 90mm SP Di is edging out the Sigma 105 , but that could simply be a camera Thing !
I ordered a K30 a few days ago ( Sold my Kx and K200D ) ..
And the Sigma 105 will go on the K30 ...
ATM the Sigma sits on a K20D , and its no contest VS Tamron on K50 ( Tamron has the edge )
But what happens when the 105 goes on the K30 ?


You have 3 options , Tamron SP-Di , Sigma 105 Macro ( out of production ) , or a Pentax 100mm Macro lens
Going away to Ebay for a moment :


Check your PM




Tamron SP 90mm F 2 8 AF Di Macro 1 1 Lens for Pentax 4960371004457 | eBay Here is a Tamron in Australia


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pentax-SMC-PENTAX-M-100mm-F4-Macro-w-Hood-Filter-/33...item4d29b15bd7 Pentax M 100mm F4 in the USA


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pentax-SMC-PENTAX-M-100mm-F4-Macro-w-Hood-Filter-/33...item4d29b15bd7 Auction


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pentax-SMC-PENTAX-M-100mm-F4-Macro-w-Hood-Filter-/33...item4d29b15bd7 Pentax A 100mm F4


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vivitar-Series-1-105-mm-f-2-5-MF-Lens-For-Pentax-/22...item339a3356f5 Vivitar series 1 ....


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Minty-Pentax-Asaki-Macro-50-mm-F-4-0-Lens-K-mount-/3...item4ae069d405 50mm - Minty ?

Last edited by old4570; 12-10-2014 at 08:47 PM.
12-10-2014, 08:38 PM   #3
Veteran Member
Nick Siebers's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,165
Also: for macros, get a tripod. Stop way down, get the DOF you need, even with slow shutter speeds. And or use a flash.
12-10-2014, 08:49 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 932
QuoteOriginally posted by Dewman Quote
I've wrung just about every ounce of sharpness I can get out of MY third-party lenses. I have a Vivitar 80-200mm lens that I consider extremely sharp. You have seen some of my posts using it. I have a Sigma 28-80mm 1:2 macro (close focus?) lens that is also very sharp. I have used a reversing ring with a SMC Pentax f:1.4, 50mm lens that gave me what I consider "exceptional" sharpness and color saturation with at least 1:1 magnification. I have a 28mm Sears macro that has turned in results that has garnered some very high praise. But.... nothing I've ever accomplished even comes close to the absolutely incredible images I see posted here by members using the brand-name, high-end, dedicated macro lenses. Eaglem's flower photos are mind-boggling! But, as hard as I try, I can't hold a candle for him to trip his shutter by! The same with some of the images mtux posts as well as many others. You simply cannot produce images like that with the lenses I'm using. Impossible!


It's obvious to me that the lenses I have.... as good as they might be.... are what they are. I think I have done well with them. I think I have pushed them to their maximum potential, which ain't half bad, sometimes. But, I'm ready to move on and move up. I would like to have one of every GOOD, dedicated macro lens on earth, but I will consider myself a lucky man if I end up with only one. So, I'm on a mission to investigate what's available, what the pros and cons are of each and which one will give me the biggest bang for my buck.


I'm not a wealthy man and money is a factor in just about every facet of my life. I'm single, live alone and have a fixed income. But, I'm determined to have one of the lenses that will allow me to no longer carry the jock-straps of those who post these magnificent images! (No offense meant, gays/gals!)


I have physical limitations that preclude me from getting down on my knees to get close to my subject, so most of my photography will be either standing up... or, bending over for short periods of time. Also, I do a lot of desk-top shooting if I can bring my subject indoors. I like photographing flowers and weeds and stuff like that. I'm not into the incredibly close-up photos of fly's eyes, so, I don't need a lens that will produce almost microscopic enlargement. Also, I'd like to do some bird photography, but I think to expect a lens to be capable of doing both high-end, quality macro shots AND get the knife-edge sharpness of some of the bird photos is nothing more than a pipe dream. I've got a Pentax-K, f:5.6, 400mm that will do for now. The birds can wait!


So.... back to the original question in the thread title: Comments or opinions please on the Sigma f:2.8, 105mm macro lens. How does it stack up against the Pentax line of dedicated macros.... for instance, the 100mm that I asked about a couple of days ago? If one is better than the other, why so? How about focal length? Which will allow me to stand off at a reasonable distance and still get the images I seek?


Thanks for your patience.
If you have Sigma 105 2.8, frankly speaking, no need to think about other macro lens in this range. It is definitely a good lens. Typically any prime macro lens are not bad.

If you do not have Sigma 105 2.8, then you have many choices as most of macro prime lenses have earned their own reputations: sharp and bokeh. Any of them can serve us good.

12-10-2014, 09:20 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Nick Siebers Quote
Also: for macros, get a tripod. Stop way down, get the DOF you need, even with slow shutter speeds. And or use a flash.

I've had a tripod for 50 years. I always stop down to get the DOF AND/OR the bokeh I want. If I'm using a tripod... and a 2-second shutter delay.... shutter speed is of no concern. I avoid flash at all cost. I DO NOT like the washed out effect it provides as opposed to natural, ambient light. If the subject needs any additional light, I always carry a mirror and a white, 8 1/2" x 11" sheet of card stock backed with aluminum foil. It's NOT the technique I need..... it's the EQUIPMENT!

---------- Post added 12-10-14 at 09:22 PM ----------

12-10-2014, 09:27 PM   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 683
If you are really keen on the Sigma 105, go for it. The focus limiter helps out when you want to control how much the AF will hunt. After selling the Sigma 90mm f/2.8 that got me into macro, I moved onto the Sigma 105 and won't look back.


Here's a large amount of work I've done with the Sigma 105, not just limited to macro:


https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sigma+105&ss=2&ct=0&mt=all&w=63342440%40N04&adv=1


Also, don't forget about the Raynox 250, as that will snap onto most of your lenses and let you get up closer without breaking the bank.
12-10-2014, 11:46 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mr.b.snowden Quote
If you are really keen on the Sigma 105, go for it. The focus limiter helps out when you want to control how much the AF will hunt. After selling the Sigma 90mm f/2.8 that got me into macro, I moved onto the Sigma 105 and won't look back.


Here's a large amount of work I've done with the Sigma 105, not just limited to macro:


https://www.flickr.com/search/?q=sigma+105&ss=2&ct=0&mt=all&w=63342440%40N04&adv=1


Also, don't forget about the Raynox 250, as that will snap onto most of your lenses and let you get up closer without breaking the bank.
Very nice work, Brian. And.... all those were shot with the same lens? If so, I'm even more impressed with the Sigma 105. My problem isn't getting enough magnification. My Sigma 28-80mm is 1:2, which is about as much magnification as I'd want or need under most circumstances. It's that pupil-piercing sharpness that I'm missing. Not only the sharpness, but the delineation that comes with the high end glass. It's the 3-D effect that eaglem and some others have in their flower photos. It's a quality that's difficult to define, but it's very special and it's what puts the truly magnificent shots in another class.... the highest class of macro/close-focus images.

12-10-2014, 11:56 PM   #8
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
photolady95's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Cruising the forum watching his back
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,712
I have the Sigma 105mm f2.8 also, but a warning if you try to do macro with a tripod you'll get frustrated real fast. Tripods are cumbersome beasts and with macro you can't move it easily in and out to get your shot in focus. I think I told you once to check eaglem's photos, but you may have missed my comment. The Sigma is the only lens he uses for his flower shots, bugs and other insects. And he does this handheld with manual focus. I know because I asked him a lot of questions before I bought the Sigma 105mm f2.8.

My shots using this lens. Handheld, or with monopod (they are easy to move in and out) most were shot handheld.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/1photolady/sets/72157645693588058/
12-11-2014, 12:10 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by photolady95 Quote
I have the Sigma 105mm f2.8 also, but a warning if you try to do macro with a tripod you'll get frustrated real fast. Tripods are cumbersome beasts and with macro you can't move it easily in and out to get your shot in focus. I think I told you once to check eaglem's photos, but you may have missed my comment. The Sigma is the only lens he uses for his flower shots, bugs and other insects. And he does this handheld with manual focus. I know because I asked him a lot of questions before I bought the Sigma 105mm f2.8.

My shots using this lens. Handheld, or with monopod (they are easy to move in and out) most were shot handheld.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/1photolady/sets/72157645693588058/
As I stated in my post, I'm not interested in photographing insects. I use a monopod for most of my work and a tripod when shooting indoors. I'm 69 years old and have been around cameras, lenses and tripods for the better part of 50 years, so I'm fully aware of the ins and outs of tripods. My query was strictly about the LENS, NOT the technique! As far as shooting hand-held, I have some physical limitations that limit my ability. A brain injury has left me with tremors, so on the bad days, a tripod is a must.
12-11-2014, 12:29 AM   #10
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
photolady95's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Cruising the forum watching his back
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,712
QuoteQuote:
I'm not interested in photographing insects
My point was showing you sharpness with this lens. Whether it be insects or flowers, the point is, this lens is sharper than any other lens I own.

Btw, I shake from tremors too, and I'm only 4 years your junior. And using a camera since I was 12.

Last edited by photolady95; 12-11-2014 at 07:08 AM.
12-11-2014, 01:20 AM   #11
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by photolady95 Quote
My point was showing you sharpness with this lens. Whether it be insects or flowers, the point is, this lens is sharper than any other lens I own.
.


Thanks. That was what I wanted to know. It helps me make a decision as to which lens I will eventually end up with.

Last edited by photolady95; 12-11-2014 at 07:07 AM.
12-11-2014, 07:43 AM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 410
The Sigma 105mm Macro is a great lens. I own it, love it, and use it very often. I bought mine used for about $300. I recommend it 100%, no hesitations.

I shoot it handheld outdoors quite often. Indoors I use a tripod when I need very long exposures but otherwise I use lights and an off camera flash and hand hold it. I do a lot of my macro shooting sitting at my desk.

As an added bonus, the 105mm Sigma works well with the Pentax 1.4 Teleconverter which gives you a bit more working distance and increases the magnification above 1:1.

If for some reason I was forced to give up all of my lenses but one I would keep the Sigma 105.
12-11-2014, 11:34 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Dewman's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 5,492
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Homo_erectus Quote
The Sigma 105mm Macro is a great lens. I own it, love it, and use it very often. I bought mine used for about $300. I recommend it 100%, no hesitations.

I shoot it handheld outdoors quite often. Indoors I use a tripod when I need very long exposures but otherwise I use lights and an off camera flash and hand hold it. I do a lot of my macro shooting sitting at my desk.

As an added bonus, the 105mm Sigma works well with the Pentax 1.4 Teleconverter which gives you a bit more working distance and increases the magnification above 1:1.

If for some reason I was forced to give up all of my lenses but one I would keep the Sigma 105.

Thank you very much for you most informative information. This is the kind of replies I'm after. A good analogy regarding this query is.... I'm in the market for a pickup. I ask for comments on the current Dodge 4x4 and instead, I get replies on how to make a proper left-hand turn! Your reply is the kind that will help me make the proper decision.... and I thank you for that, sir.
12-11-2014, 11:52 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 410
QuoteOriginally posted by Dewman Quote
Thank you very much for you most informative information. This is the kind of replies I'm after. A good analogy regarding this query is.... I'm in the market for a pickup. I ask for comments on the current Dodge 4x4 and instead, I get replies on how to make a proper left-hand turn! Your reply is the kind that will help me make the proper decision.... and I thank you for that, sir.
Happy to help!

It seems that there are a lot of well intentioned people here who nevertheless are not very good at addressing the questions that are actually asked. I've experienced this myself in threads that I have created and consequently I try not to drift too far from the topic at hand when I post in other peoples threads.

Good luck with your decision
12-11-2014, 02:11 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,332
About 5 years ago when I was looking to buy a macro lens I spent days looking at reviews and sample photos. The conclusion I came to is that any of the dedicated 1:1 macros were all pretty darn awesome, especially in terms of sharpness. The 90mm tamron, 105mm sigma, and pentax DFA 100mm were my prime contenders as I wanted something that had AF so it could do double duty as a fast midrange telephoto. I ended up with the pentax since the price difference was small at the time, but I'm positive I would have been happy with any of them.

Incidentally, I also started with the hope of bird photography but realized a macro lens was much more affordable and I'm much faster than most small scale subjects, especially flowers and weeds, so they can't flee the way birds can. If you limit yourself to feeder birds that get used to you standing next to the feeder after 15 minutes, a 100mm macro can do pretty well here too with some patience. 100mm is also great for nests and fledglings that aren't smart enough to flee from humans yet (sensitivity and caution required).

QuoteOriginally posted by Dewman Quote
I avoid flash at all cost. I DO NOT like the washed out effect it provides as opposed to natural, ambient light.
That's flash used poorly
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
100mm, bird, ebay, f4, hood, images, k30, lens, lenses, macro, move, pentax, photography, photos, sharpness, sigma, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX Macro jatrax Sold Items 13 09-12-2014 04:51 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro DG EX filoxophy Sold Items 5 08-15-2014 12:15 PM
Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro vs Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG vs Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP dyusem Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 02-13-2010 08:11 PM
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro vs smcP-D FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro Trub Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 04-20-2007 11:58 PM
Any comments on the Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 lens TedP Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 03-22-2007 08:27 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top