Bit more advice sought .....

[Nick T]

Hi All,

I'm just getting ready for the summer (hahaha that's if we have one this year!) to take some close ups of butterflies and the like at my local nature reserve where I normally take bird shots.

I've been looking at reviews of Macro lenses and have come to the conclusion ... I'm confused

Any thoughts on what you guys think would be the best out of the following list (they're all Sigma's - I know that Canon make good lenses but they are a tad more expensive)

105mm f2.8
150mm f2.8
180mm f3.5

I did consider the Tamron 180mm for a while but it doesn't seem to be any better than the Sigma's and it's £200 more. I leaning towards the 150 or 180 at the moment but I'll see what you guys say.

[NickCantle]

Morning Nick...

Well, you're bound to get mixed answers here, and personally, I use the 105mm for flowers, fungi and stock photography, but for dragons and butterflies, as I'm sure a WAB member owning one will say, the 150mm is more suited. The 150mm allows you more working distance and in the case of dragons and butterflies, you're going to need a fair distance without spooking them whereas the 105mm does require a close working space, which I personally love. I've not had experience, nor heard about the f3.5 180mm, but I'm sure someone here will be able to extend on that a little

Hope you make the right decision for you

Nick

[Maccattack]

I agree with Nick , the 150 sounds best . I vaguely remember someone saying the 180 is a bit heavy for hand held shots .It would be hard to combine birds and butterflies within the range of 1 lens . Loads of dragonfly chasers use the 150 , I have a 105 that is great for my purposes so I'm not talking as a 150 user.

All the best

Malcolm

[Nick T]

Hi Nick and Malcolm,

Thanks for that, I do take shots of flowers as well but I'm quite happy using my Fuji for that as I can get really close with that. But this is for butterflies and dragonflies so a bit of extra distance is probably a good thing as you say.

The 150mm is looking favourite at the moment then.

[NickCantle]

It's definitely a good lens that sometimes I wish I had bought instead of the 105mm, but ah well, you can't regret things

Nick

[GerryNick2]

Of the five Sigma macro lenses to choose from the 105mm would be my first choice. It has a F45 min aperture (f32 depending on your camera)which will give you more depth of field, closest focusing distance of 31cm which should be ok for most subjects, it is fairly light at 460gm and not a bad price for what you get.

If you were to go for the 150mm the min. aperture is f22, min. focusing distance is 38cm but it is nearly double the weight of the 105mm at 895gm. Given macro photograhy usually requires a tripod, weight may not be an issue for you.

Gerry

[JonSadler]

I have a Sigma 180 3.5 and it is great. It gives you a little more range than the other two. There are some great reviews of it allied to a range TCs at this site:

Juza Nature Photography

Regards
Jon