Sony 90mm vs Sigma 105mm for Sony A1

Hello,

Looking for input on which macro lens offers better quality between the Sony 90mm and the Sigma 105mm. Thanks!

Some discussion on that subject here:

View archived post in: Sony A7IV flash sync speed

you might need to scroll down to where Phil Rudin starts discussing the macro lenses

Also of interest might be this post for settings: 

View archived post in: Macro lens slow focus

Also here: 

View archived post in: Sony Macro Options: Sony 90mm vs Sigma 105mm

Thanks a lot for putting this together, @ChrisRoss! It appears that the Sony 90mm is more versatile.

9 hours ago, ChrisRoss said:

Some discussion on that subject here:

View archived post in: Sony A7IV flash sync speed

you might need to scroll down to where Phil Rudin starts discussing the macro lenses

Also of interest might be this post for settings: 

View archived post in: Macro lens slow focus

Also here: 

View archived post in: Sony Macro Options: Sony 90mm vs Sigma 105mm

 

Thanks for this

There is one person that used both although not on the A1

Currently the Sony can be found at discounted prices vs the sigma

The problem with autofocus for macro and sony cameras is that apparently the camera does not focus wide open but with the actual aperture dialled in.

I yet have to check this myself but of course when is dark and you do not have a focus light this will result into issues

In terms of optical quality the sigma is a better lens in terms of focus seems worse but all the reports are with cameras that did not have the same autofocus of the current range

I have both right now. As has been said, the Sigma has better image quality, while the Sony has better autofocus. But the differences aren't all that great, and either one will work fine. I'm personally leaning towards keeping the Sigma.

Whether or not Sony cameras focus with the aperture open or stopped down depends on a few settings. In AF-S mode they focus with the aperture open, while in AF-C mode they focus with the aperture stopped down (which can lead to hunting in low light). But the newest bodies have a setting to change that behavior so they focus with the aperture open even in AF-C mode.

I have both right now. As has been said, the Sigma has better image quality, while the Sony has better autofocus. But the differences aren't all that great, and either one will work fine. I'm personally leaning towards keeping the Sigma.
Whether or not Sony cameras focus with the aperture open or stopped down depends on a few settings. In AF-S mode they focus with the aperture open, while in AF-C mode they focus with the aperture stopped down (which can lead to hunting in low light). But the newest bodies have a setting to change that behavior so they focus with the aperture open even in AF-C mode.

10 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Which setting is this?

It's called "Aperture Drive in AF". Setting it to "Focus Priority" should make the camera focus with the aperture open even in AF-C mode.

It's called "Aperture Drive in AF". Setting it to "Focus Priority" should make the camera focus with the aperture open even in AF-C mode.

10 hours ago, Interceptor121 said:

Thank you
Have you tried the focus limiter of the lens? It has a 0.3-0.5 setting

No problem. Yes, both lenses have a focus limiter setting of ~0.3m-0.5m, and that can speed up AF a bit for macro shooting. However, I find 0.5m a bit limiting as there are times when I want to focus a little bit farther than that. So I usually leave the focus limiter off. I wish the focus limiter ranges were customizable like they are on some lenses/cameras. I recently tested a Tamron 90mm with a customizable focus limiter, but I don't really think it's worth using an adapted lens just for that feature.

13 hours ago, Isaac Szabo said:

No problem. Yes, both lenses have a focus limiter setting of ~0.3m-0.5m, and that can speed up AF a bit for macro shooting. However, I find 0.5m a bit limiting as there are times when I want to focus a little bit farther than that. So I usually leave the focus limiter off. I wish the focus limiter ranges were customizable like they are on some lenses/cameras. I recently tested a Tamron 90mm with a customizable focus limiter, but I don't really think it's worth using an adapted lens just for that feature.

If the water is clear 0.5 may be limiting i agree 

I gave up focus limiting on the 90mm and back button focus with the Sony A7R IV, I had used both on prior A7 R III and A7R II models because the AF was slow and for macro the focus limiting speedup the process. The AF on the A1 is so quick that limiting the range serves little useful purpose once you are in a range from around four feet to 1:1. This speed has carried over to the A7 IV and I am sure the A7R V although these cameras don't have the stacked sensor so they will not be quite so fast in some situations like high speed shooting of multi frames per second.

43 minutes ago, Phil Rudin said:

I gave up focus limiting on the 90mm and back button focus with the Sony A7R IV, I had used both on prior A7 R III and A7R II models because the AF was slow and for macro the focus limiting speedup the process. The AF on the A1 is so quick that limiting the range serves little useful purpose once you are in a range from around four feet to 1:1. This speed has carried over to the A7 IV and I am sure the A7R V although these cameras don't have the stacked sensor so they will not be quite so fast in some situations like high speed shooting of multi frames per second.

I am more and more tempted by the Sigma 105mm DG DN which is a much recent lens than the now 6 years old Sony

Let me see if I can add that to my already shocking expenses list....!

The 90mm Sony has been constantly and continuously been ranked among the best Macro lens ever made. In terms of sharpness, contrast, bokeh. etc... 

Yes, it is 6 yeasr old. And so what? What do we want more that we have alreday? The Sigma 105 is newer. OK. And so what? Let's be honest, it is for UW use, and inevitably, we will ALWAYS have the column of water between the lens (front of the dome) and our tiny subject at 1:1 Macro. Who believe our eyes shall make then the difference between the Sigma 105 and Sony 90? I cannot.

And i will not turn into a GAS syndrom and move from the Sony to the Sigma. Only my wallet will see the difference.

The Sigma 70 macro lens was more recent as well and I would not recommend it for U/W use at all. I am sure the 105 is a much better lens. The Sony 90 is the first of several Sony lenses I have perchases in the last over six years and it is still the best macro I have ever used. 

The 90mm Sony has been constantly and continuously been ranked among the best Macro lens ever made. In terms of sharpness, contrast, bokeh. etc... 
Yes, it is 6 yeasr old. And so what? What do we want more that we have alreday? The Sigma 105 is newer. OK. And so what? Let's be honest, it is for UW use, and inevitably, we will ALWAYS have the column of water between the lens (front of the dome) and our tiny subject at 1:1 Macro. Who believe our eyes shall make then the difference between the Sigma 105 and Sony 90? I cannot.
And i will not turn into a GAS syndrom and move from the Sony to the Sigma. Only my wallet will see the difference.
 

@Interceptor121Interceptor121 I am sure you are right. And I was not considering above water since I do only underwater photo. 

With that being said, I am personally more than happy with my 90mm.

As I’ve mentioned previously, my experience so far is that the differences between these two lenses are minor. Both are very good, and I think almost anyone would be happy with either one. So far I think the most significant difference for me personally is that the Sigma gives slightly better image quality at wide apertures, particularly in terms of less longitudinal chromatic aberration than the Sony which can exhibit a magenta cast in out of focus areas. If anyone’s interested, here’s a link to a dropbox folder containing a full resolution comparison throughout the aperture range at roughly 1:2 magnification.

10 hours ago, Isaac Szabo said:

As I’ve mentioned previously, my experience so far is that the differences between these two lenses are minor. Both are very good, and I think almost anyone would be happy with either one. So far I think the most significant difference for me personally is that the Sigma gives slightly better image quality at wide apertures, particularly in terms of less longitudinal chromatic aberration than the Sony which can exhibit a magenta cast in out of focus areas. If anyone’s interested, here’s a link to a dropbox folder containing a full resolution comparison throughout the aperture range at roughly 1:2 magnification.

Thank you

One of the things that I do not like of the 90mm is the amount of focus breathing this makes focus stacking problematic

However today I bought the 90mm on a black friday offer as I got a great deal from my local camera store

Will now proceed with the decomposition of the lens features

13 hours ago, lambee01 said:

@Interceptor121Interceptor121 I am sure you are right. And I was not considering above water since I do only underwater photo. 

With that being said, I am personally more than happy with my 90mm.

 

No worries and great photos

At the end I bought it. I am not going to post spiders and bugs and flowers here but that is what is going to be starting with!

Don't know why this is such a discussion. Most times I don't shoot macro at wide open F2.8. Stopped down, both lenses perform almost the same. So its just boils down to IBIS (don't know if really needed, we have in-body IBIS) or the focal lenght.
I think Sigma stay the winner because of the value, you safe a lot of money. Both will perform very good on all bodies if you stopping down and even wide open the Sony will create perfect shots if you don't crop like a maniac or print extreme large.