TL 60mm Macro vs Sigma 70mm f2.8 DG Macro Art Lens

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm hesitant to go for the TL 55-135, and leaning towards the TL 60mm. However this Sigma 70mm f2.8 DG Macro Art Lens - L-Mount just came up on the radar. Most of my photography is Landcape/Streetscape. I already have 11-23, 23, 18-56 lenses so need something a little longer. I borrowed a TL 60mm a while back and enjoyed using that, but its $3k...

Any thoughts/opinions/suggestions?

MTIA!

[wda]

Without question, my choice would be the TL 55-135 lens. The 60 mm or 70 mm lenses only make sense if you do a lot of macro work or portraiture at full-aperture. The tele-lens is a perfect partner for travel and landscapes.

Expect a lot of contrary advice. 🤩

[gteague]

i hadn't realized it, but i see b&h is showing the sigma macro for under $600 releasing in mid march. that's about 25% the cost of the leica 60mm macro and if the tests and reviews show it's up to the 'art' designator, would seem a no-brainer. that would give me a 35 and a 105 equivalent and 105 might be over my limit for hand holding without any stabilization. but then again, i rarely shoot in low light and would be able to bump the shutter speed upwards and perhaps use the electronic shutter.

good tip. /guy

[gteague]

amazon (u.s.) has a sigma for $600 even from a japanese source with an early march arrival date. /guy

[geoffreyg]

Big fan of the 55-135. Takes a bit to get used to. Offers a lot of flexibility. Can do reasonable close too if you fiddle with its manual focus. 

[gteague]

Just now, geoffreyg said:

Big fan of the 55-135. Takes a bit to get used to. Offers a lot of flexibility. Can do reasonable close too if you fiddle with its manual focus. 

do any of the tl lens have ois? if not, anything over about 55mm in tl terms is going to be a non-starter. this was a frustration with the sigma fp i'm ditching for the cl although the lumix 16-35 hardly needs any and the 70-200 has it inbuilt. /guy

[geoffreyg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

no on OIS. But for the 55-135, raise the ISO (say to 1600) and up the shutter speed. It works fine, although not so well in low light. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[gteague]

6 hours ago, geoffreyg said:

no on OIS. But for the 55-135, raise the ISO (say to 1600) and up the shutter speed. It works fine, although not so well in low light. 

the sigma fp this cl is replacing also lacked ibis and it had a setting to bump up the shutter speed by two stops on every shot and i thought that a reasonable compromise and it did help. no comparable setting on the cl, but you can set your minimum shutter to speed to, say, 1/60th which at least keeps you from going too low for your abilities. 

/guy

[Gregm61]

On 2/26/2020 at 1:12 PM, gteague said:

do any of the tl lens have ois? if not, anything over about 55mm in tl terms is going to be a non-starter. this was a frustration with the sigma fp i'm ditching for the cl although the lumix 16-35 hardly needs any and the 70-200 has it inbuilt. /guy

No IS in the camera or any lens. I sold a substantial amount of Olympus equipment with the great IS system to help fund my CL system with no IS, including the 55-135 and love this new system.

The great sensor allows me to use Auto ISO and I have the ISO set to max out at a very clean 6400, not just 1600, aperture priority with the camera choosing a shutter speed of 4x the focal length in use.

 

[gteague]

i hear you on the ibis. my s1 has spoiled me with 4-5 stops in body and a couple more with an ois lens. i've gotten sloppy as a result.

as you said, i'll just have to bump up the shutter speed to compensate and i'm willing to go a notch or two above 6400.

/guy

[wda]

9 hours ago, Gregm61 said:

No IS in the camera or any lens. I sold a substantial amount of Olympus equipment with the great IS system to help fund my CL system with no IS, including the 55-135 and love this new system.

The great sensor allows me to use Auto ISO and I have the ISO set to max out at a very clean 6400, not just 1600, aperture priority with the camera choosing a shutter speed of 4x the focal length in use.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Indeed, we are rather spoiled by the rapid advances in photographic technology. When I aspired to own a camera in the late1940s, choice of cameras was extremely limited. Coupled rangefinders were the dream features given the funds. Not one camera had an inbuilt exposure meter and image stabilization was not even a realistic dream. I remember the excitement when inbuilt flash arrived.  Yet a vast body of outstanding photography was produced by photographers who mastered the problems of camera shake and exposure control.

As Greg says, there are simple techniques to overcome camera shake made possible by Auto-ISO, an unthinkable feature when I started my learning with roll film cameras in the 1950s.

[ramarren]

A tripod makes camera shake a non-issue, presuming you use it.  

I find doing useful macro work or long tele work hand-held always produces more duds due to camera motion than putting the camera on a sturdy support, regardless of whether the camera is equipped with image stabilization technology. Image stabilization is mostly useful for when shooting sports and other motion subjects where you need long reach and mobility, and ultimate critical sharpness is less important.

G

 

[gteague]

i think the video guys would quarrel with those being the best uses of it. but you could give them 10 stops of stabilization and they'd still buy a gimbal. those folks are strange.  

/guy