Once upon a time, Sigma was a brand considered by many to be a compromise lens if you couldn’t afford the familiar names. However, times have changed and Sigma has gone beyond offering competitive lenses to create remarkable lenses and even some notable firsts in the industry. As a photographer who works a lot in product work, I decided to put Sigma 70mm f/2.8 DG Macro Art . Lens in a shootout against Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macroand the result is… well, read on and find out for yourself!
Before we dive in, I’ll give you a pop quiz. I’ll put three photos side by side so you can guess which one was taken with Canon and which one was taken with Sigma. These are SOOC (straight out of camera) images with no editing required.
Keep your answers nearby and we’ll come back to them when we’re done.
Now, let me introduce you to Sigma 70mm f/2.8. It’s a lightweight, weather-resistant lens designed to deliver clear images and true 1:1 magnification for close-up photography. After taking pictures with it for three days, I was suddenly impressed with this lens. The truth is, there are some cases where I have to rotate my camera to see what lens I’m actually wearing. Both weigh the same: 515 g / 18.2 oz. Both take sharp, clear, and sharp photos. It wasn’t until I looked at them in the post that I was able to spot some minor differences.
sharpness
I could barely distinguish the sharpness between these two lenses, which surprised me, as my Canon 100mm is one of my favorite lenses for its impeccable clarity. There is a difference when it comes to sharpness. When working on gel creme macro textures, Canon lenses have difficulty in focusing. I focused on the highlight to try to give it a higher contrast point, but it had to do a lot of searching due to the low contrast of the subject. I was disappointed. The Sigma, on the other hand, doesn’t look for focus and takes pictures pretty easily. When reviewing the images on my computer, I discovered that even though the Canon lens searches for its focus intensely, it still delivers perfectly sharp images every shot. The Sigma lens, which gave me no trouble focusing, produced a small amount of out-of-focus images, but only about 15-20%. The remaining 80%+ are perfect in their quality.
Surprising, disappointing discovery
Just as I’m finishing work in my studio, I have one last image on my checklist: my macro texture. To take this shot, I reached for my extension tube. If you are not familiar with extension tubes, you can read my article This. I took some stunning super macros with it and then reached for the Sigma for a few comparison shots. To my surprise, it refused to focus. Classified, completely rejected. After troubleshooting and research, I discovered that the Sigma 70mm is a wire-focus lens. Wired focusing means that focus is not mechanically combined with the focus ring on the barrel. Instead, electronic signals from the autofocus system or the focus ring are received by the focus motor to focus. Wired focus lenses are said to work better with autofocus, providing faster and quieter focusing. However, this type of focusing system is said to perform worse when focusing manually, and in my case, with the extension tube, I couldn’t focus at all. Speaking with a Sigma representative at Imaging USA, I learned that they offer a conversion lenshas the same function as extension tubes, amplifying the focal length by 1.2 times.
Value
Going into this gunfight, I purposely didn’t look at the price difference. After the whole experiment was over and I’d given my opinion on the lenses, I looked up Sigma’s pricing. Based on how competitive it is, I would predict it to be a little cheaper, maybe two or three hundred less. The Canon 100mm f/2.8 priced at $1,299. To my surprise, Sigma 70mm f/2.8 appeared for a shocking value of only $569 — 57% less!
Penalty kick results
Now, with all the facts and specifications in place, the real test: can you see the difference in the pictures? It’s easy to get weird with technical terms about focus mechanism and optical design, but for many of us, it’s two simple things: performance and cost. Take your answer and find out: can you really tell which lens is twice as expensive as the other?
Stop thinking
For me, the difference in image quality ranges from small to indistinguishable. It almost hurts me to say this, as I am a serious member of the Canon fan club, but the reality is that the Sigma 70mm is an extremely bad lens. Many times, I have to rotate my camera and look to see what lens I actually have on my camera. It weighs the same, and it shoots quietly and sharply. Launched at less than half the price, Sigma has clearly proven that they are producing state-of-the-art lenses at incredible prices. Am I registered as a Sigma representative? Not yet. But if I find myself in charge of too many brand-name devices, I can feel a bit like a stubborn lover. Sigma delivered a top-of-the-line lens here and made me completely rethink my perception of the brand.
How did your pop test go? Are you accurate in determining which photos were taken with Canon and which were taken with Sigma? Have you ever used a Sigma lens? If so, what are your impressions? If you haven’t, why haven’t you? The most interesting part of my articles is your contributions in the comments section below. I will end the post by sharing some finished images that I took with Sigma 70mm f/2.8 DG Macro Art . Lens.
Which of these lenses do you prefer?
