My current (non IS) Canon 100mm Macro lens is in need of repair and rather than do this I have decided to replace it with a new one.
Having visited a dealer and looked at the newer Canon 100mm f2.8L IS version and also the Sigma 150mm APO EX DG HSM macro I am still undecided between the two so would appreciate any feedback or comments regarding the pro's and cons of these two lenses.
I will probably be spending the greater part of my time photographing subjects such as butterflies, dragonflies, flowers and smaller insects such as ladybirds etc.
I will be using the lens handheld 90 per cent of my time and therefore feel the IS should be an improvement over my current non IS model.
Having said that I tend to use the camera in manual mode with flash and normally have a shutter speed of 1/250 sec selected to minimise camera shake.
At the moment I cannot decide if the 150mm focal length would offer an advantage over the 100mm of the Canon lens.
Photographing butterflies for instance I would assume being able to stand back a shade further would mean the subject taking flight less often.
On the downside however does this mean that unwanted blades of grass etc are more likely to be in frame as with the 100mm length you tend to get in close and through such distractions ?
I have also been offered a nearly new non IS version of the Canon 100mm lens at a good price which begs the question is the IS version worth the extra £300 in the first instance ?
One advantage the Sigma option does seem to have is that I believe I can use my Current Canon 1.4X extender with it.
As I currently do not have a decent mid-tele lens this would seem to be a bonus for me.
Before parting with my money I would however welcome any comments or feedback concerning the Canon v Sigma option and what might be the better lens for my needs.
Many Thanks
Having visited a dealer and looked at the newer Canon 100mm f2.8L IS version and also the Sigma 150mm APO EX DG HSM macro I am still undecided between the two so would appreciate any feedback or comments regarding the pro's and cons of these two lenses.
I will probably be spending the greater part of my time photographing subjects such as butterflies, dragonflies, flowers and smaller insects such as ladybirds etc.
I will be using the lens handheld 90 per cent of my time and therefore feel the IS should be an improvement over my current non IS model.
Having said that I tend to use the camera in manual mode with flash and normally have a shutter speed of 1/250 sec selected to minimise camera shake.
At the moment I cannot decide if the 150mm focal length would offer an advantage over the 100mm of the Canon lens.
Photographing butterflies for instance I would assume being able to stand back a shade further would mean the subject taking flight less often.
On the downside however does this mean that unwanted blades of grass etc are more likely to be in frame as with the 100mm length you tend to get in close and through such distractions ?
I have also been offered a nearly new non IS version of the Canon 100mm lens at a good price which begs the question is the IS version worth the extra £300 in the first instance ?
One advantage the Sigma option does seem to have is that I believe I can use my Current Canon 1.4X extender with it.
As I currently do not have a decent mid-tele lens this would seem to be a bonus for me.
Before parting with my money I would however welcome any comments or feedback concerning the Canon v Sigma option and what might be the better lens for my needs.
Many Thanks