I'm reviving this topic because currently looking at upgrading my Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di MACRO (mostly because I want a non-extending lens with IS), but am stuck between the:
Tamron SP 90mm F/2.8 Di VC USD MACRO
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS USM Macro
Sigma AF 150mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro OS HSM.
The main issue here is working distance; how important is the focal length if the MFD's are all relatively similar?
So which macro lens should I choose for full frame, my interest is mostly larger subjects such as butterflies. I do like a little extra working distance, but that Sigma is a pretty big lens. Any thoughts?
Dear Friend mrsfotografie.
Ha, Ha, Ha, 1 best Macro lens that you forget to mention = Canon EF 180 mm. F 3.5L Macro USM , That fit to your need, This Lens that can shoot far away from Butterfly or bees with out chase them away. Yes I have 6-8 years already and Love this Big Babe too, Plus I still love my Canon EF 100 MM. F/ 2.8 L IS Macro too.
Nice to talk to you, Have a great Late afternoon on this Tuesday.
Dear friend Surapon, you have an impressive and interesting flash setup. Very good to have a bracket on the camera, not the body. Thanks for the recommendation of the 180 mm, however I think 150 mm is long enough really AND the 180 has no IS which I really want because I like to do available light + hand-held macro photography as far as the light allows.
The wise decision here seems to me the Canon; it has IS, weather sealing (FWIW) and doubles as a portrait-macro, AND it has a 67mm filter size which helps me reduce the number of filter sizes I have in my lens collection. Still, I have time to consider...
Edit: it looks like the Canon has is quite significant Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA) at f/2.8; the Sigma is much better in that sense. How is that from a real world perspective?