Battle of the E-Mount Macros: Sony 90mm f2.8 OSS vs Sigma 105 f2.8 DG DN
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ต.ค. 2024
- A few months back, we did a first impressions video of the all-new Sigma 105 f2.8 DG DN Macro lens for Sony E Mount. Many requests were made asking us to compare the 90mm vs the 105. We love a good challenge so that is exactly what we did!
Big thanks to Sigma Singapore and Sony Singapore for their support. Having said that, these are our thoughts and our thoughts only. Enjoy!
Read more here
tech360.tv/rev...
To support us, get it on Amazon here
amzn.to/3eFaQcN
amzn.to/3tuxadr
Editor/Host - Bobby Tonelli
Camera/Producer - Bryce Koh
Video Editor - Jervies Baldemoro
Check out Bobby Tonelli
/
Follow us on
Facebook - /
Instagram - / tech360.tv
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | อาจารย์โอเล่ ญาณสัมผัส ผ่าดวงคนดัง ประเทศไทยจะเป็นยังไงหลังจากนี้!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gszT2O76fL4/mqdefault.jpg)
These are macro lens and not a single photo was taken at the closest point. I mean, people most likely shoot macro with these and would be nice to have a few macro shots just toake the comparison even more fair.
I came here to say this. Kind of strange to compare 2 macro lenses and not show a single shot of 1:1 magnification
Both of them suck as macro and Sigma suck more. Its slow, sluggish, inaccurate autofocus, produce blurry images 80% of the time if you shoot handheld very close up, even if you select area it may bip but on close look nothing is really in focus, all soft, also it does shift colors depending on the light, for example I shoot hot pink flower in the shadow and it came out purple, I shoot orange flower at the sun and it came out yellow (other lenses didn't do it). I'm returning it, as I specialize in macro.. Regarding sony 90mm I was not impress with it as macro either, its good to shoot close up but not macro (there is a big difference) and returned it few years back when it came out), and I don't know what to get to full frame cam as nothing else available that I haven't tried, so back to crop sensor for macro shooting, because it seems like my crop sensor macro lenses do better job.
@@lldd11 If you specialise in macro photography and not able to get good macro photos with these lenses then you're doing something wrong! Do you ever shoot in manual and use a tripod? Do you use a flash?
@@tilikumtim5562 I use special light and never flash - you can scary all bugs with the flash, plush reflection of flash never looks good on anything. Also if you are taking macro using tripod you, you are not taking flowers or bugs for sure. You need perfect conditions, non moving subject to use tripod or manual mode. WHen you try to catch a bug, bee or butterfly or outdoor plan that is moving - then everything you just mentioned (manual mode, flash and tripod) you can through to garbage because its not gonna work.
I second that. This was not a very helpful video.
Literally just bought the sigma a couple weeks ago...it did cost a little less but I am so glad they are so similar! Your videos have been so timely.
Thanks! Glad it helped
@Brixton Nathanael I have reported you! Stop now
Sigma is $200-300 cheaper than the Sony in Canada. And the Sigma also comes with weather sealing. I think I will be pulling the trigger on the Sigma.
Understand. Good choice
Weather sealing is a big plus
Think about it. The Sony lens came out in 2015. This lens is six years old and still performing very well. I purchased this in 2016 and I still have it. If you are still on the fence and own a sony e mount camera, you will not be disappointed. I've used it for weddings quite a bit. It is crazy sharp. It even functions a portrait lens as well, albeit a little slow to focus. In terms of sharpness, it is up there with my 135 GM.
Finally! I've been waiting a long time for this review! Thank you! Glad to see they're neck and neck in terms of sharpness though I kinda wish Sony had an aperture ring like on Sigma's. Makes work faster when doing macro photography.
Understand. For me it’s not a big deal due to the fact the Sony had the dials I can control it with, but I get why some would prefer the physical aperture ring
I find myself grabbing the aperture ring when available over using the camera. It’s there and it’s quick. I’ve always preferred it on the lens . Some of the lenses don’t have stiff enough detentions and they move easily on modern lenses.
I just ordered the sigma for my Panasonic, looking forward it, thanks!
Works great on the Lumix cameras!
After going back and forth between these two lenses, I ordered the Sony this afternoon.
Bobby, how did you find the IBIS worked on the S1R with the non-stabilized Sigma compared to the Sony where I presume that you were getting a combination of IBIS and lens-based stabilization?
I think the S1R has one of the best IBIS systems out. Works great with the 105
Hi Bobby, nice comparison! Very interesting, have the Sigma Macro Lens with the S5. Its a little bit hard to get sharp results in my opinion.
What aperture do you use with the Sigma 105?
Usually try and stop down to get the sharpness you might prefer. In this video I was testing 2.8 only but for certain subjects I’ll stop down to 5 to 11 depending
could your shutter speed possibly be a bit too low?
Try setting your shutterspeed above 1/100.
Happy with my 90 G, great portrait lens too.
It’s a good lens
Many compliments for test! also, sigma 105 is sharper of sony 90? while af is less reactive with sigma? thanks and saluti dall italia!
ps i have sony a7 3
Thanks. They are both about equal in sharpness. AF is similar as well. The only big differences are focal length and OSS in the Sony lens
@@TECH360TV thanks 👍🏾💯
@@TECH360TV And the aperture ring ?
Great video, thanks for taking time to show us side-by-side comparison. However, you didn’t mention the significant price difference between the two. The Sony typically sells for about $1100 where the Sigma is about $800. If you own a camera (like my Sony a9) it possesses image stabilization therefore to spend an extra $300 for the Sony makes little sense imho. Also another reviewer stated he like the bokeh of the Sigma over the Sony. So I’m purchasing the Sigma now. Please keep the comparisons coming…you really help us buyers that are walking the fence on a new purchase. Thanks!
Can I used the sigma with crop cam (a4600) to shoot food and products? I just bought the sigma yesterday and now everyone recommended to change it with the sony since I didn’t use it yet 😕 Really confused!!
Yes you can. No prob at all
Two years have passed since you wrote your comment. What did you do??
@4:07 There is no way the sigma was "darker" at the same F stop. Something changed. Either cloud conditions or accidental F stop bump.
Any ideas on how would Sigma compete with Sony on Sony body? Could it be that Sigma is better optimised for Lumix?
Just bought the 90mm Sony for the price of Sigma and it was still a tough choice. For their regular prices I think it would've been easier to pick Sigma. But both are such great lenses it's hard to go wrong.
Have you used the 70mm macro from sigma? Do you think it worth it to switch to either one of these from the 70mm?
I did. I think the 90 and the 105 are faster focusing. The 70 is a fantastic lens so it’s tough to say is it worth the switch. Depends on your photography
I just got the Sony 90mm 2.8 Macro. It’s an incredible lens. Bang for the buck!
Does the Sony combine IBIS with the OSS in the lens?
Yes. They do.
the sony has something that the sigma 105 doesnt and that is OSS and that can really help you in lower light and video.
True. But the sigma has slightly more reach. Just depends really what you need
Other reviews have commented that the Sigma's AF makes enough noise to be picked up near the camera during video recording. The Sony's AF is pretty much silent. If you want to do macro video I think the Sony is likely the better purchase for this reason alone. If macro video isn't a concern though the Sigma is quite a bit cheaper for a lens that performs pretty much equally well, plus being able to be a bit further from subjects can be desirable for 1:1 macro work.
Sony 90mm 🔥 Just love this lens.
Agree. Its A Great Lens
Our dealer is selling Sony 1199€ and Sigma 749€. I cant see 450€ difference for Sony, any of those fotos 🥸
Only way you will see a difference is in the OIS.
Only two reasons i would prefer is due to its resale and rest of my lens collection is Sony.
"you will notice of course due to the 90, that more things in focus because it is a bit further back than the sigma (105mm) " - I'm confused here a bit :) You meant that you were capturing the same subject from the same distance, so the zero point AKA the sensor was further at the 90mm sony vs the 105mm sigma? I mean; IF you would like to put the same object to the sensor, you can go further with the sigma, since it is 105mm vs the sony and the step back will compensate the shallow DOF of the 105mm vs the 90mm. Can you clarify please what is happened due to that scenario? Or did you accidently mixed up the two images? Thanks in advance! :)
Ita a very good comparison in the real test and give many photos to compare...
But the problem is Can anyone give me a suggest between the Sony and the sigma..., I have the sigma 85mm so that i don't need the function from the macro lens to take potraits..
For the body is using a7iii with IBIS in the body.., so i dont think i need that much from the OSS of the sony lens.., and i prefer the sharpest of the sigma.., but i think there are much considering the power from sony in the AF, switch easily the AF by just push or pull the focus ring, and the OSS for the video...,
I know from my opinion its like more good for me to take the sigma but i'm still confused because there are no much second used sigma lens in the market that i can buy from...😂😂
FYI the secondhand with good condition in my country the sony is more cheaper now than the sigma...
Thanks for the video mate...
you are best bro thanks for this video 😍😍💐💐💐💐💐
Both great. Sony shines !
Neither one of these lenses is striking me as proper macro lenses. I'm just not seeing the sharpness and fine detail it's normally seen in a true macro. Personally, these images look like they could have been taken with a nifty fifty, just with more bokeh. Not worth the extra money in my opinion. I want national geography insect photos level of detail if I'm going to invest in a macro.
Well, he is shooting at 2.8 on natural light, and i don't think he went to the 1:1 distance
That requires focus stacking
Tl;do no difference
The main differences are Sony has IS, Sigma has WR, Signma has extra 15mm focal length, Sony is bit more expensive, Sigma has slightly nicer bokeh (although that might be subjective) and Sony is easier to switch from AF to Manual. If none of those things matter, then there's little to no difference between them.