60mm vs 60mm

[GFFPhoto]

I have read that the O60 is a world class macro that rivals any other systems best, but I was wondering how it compares to the Sigma 60 for regular shooting. I'm considering a lens in this FL, but I have never shot macro. I like the idea of having a lens as good in its niche as the O60, but its over twice as expensive, and I might never shoot macro (or I might discover I love it). So... lets hear some opinions :smile:

Oh, and what sort of accessories do you need for macro shooting, Special lights? And any experience with the GX7s IBIS with this lens?

 

[budeny]

Be careful, I had same dilemma couple months ago and even though I have nothing but praise for Sigma 60mm, I ended up with 75mm/f1.8 and my occasional itching for macros is well fulfilled by Raynox 250 adapter.

 

[LowriderS10]

While I've never had either, the Sigma seems to have excellent reviews, and you can always use some inexpensive tubes to find out if you like macro or not.

*EDIT*: I've removed the link, as the test contained within was wildly inaccurate (supposedly testing the Sigma's sharpness from f1.8 ).

 

[pdk42]

Be careful, I had same dilemma couple months ago and even though I have nothing but praise for Sigma 60mm, I ended up with 75mm/f1.8 and my occasional itching for macros is well fulfilled by Raynox 250 adapter.

From reviews I've read, the Sigma seems excellent, but the 75mm is often quoted as being one of the sharpest lenses in any system (although I'm sure the Sigma is more than sharp enough for 99% of uses and it's much cheaper). I too have the Raynox 250 and for occasional macro, it's very good and works well on the 75. Would probably do a similar job on the Sigma 60 I would think.

 

[Atom Ant]

Get the Σ for general use

I f you don't have a particular interest in macro, but just want the focal length for regular shooting, I'd be inclined to save a few dollars.

I haven't used the Σ 60mm, but it seems to to get positive reviews.

I have the Olympus 60mm and it is a very nice lens but I don't use it for general shooting - the focus speed for non-macro use is nothing like what you have become accustomed to with almost every other μ43 lens.

 

[jyc860923]

I have the sigma and macro converter ring and the combo works fine.

I don't have to mention again how good the sigma is, edge to edge, but if you do macro a lot, I think it's better to have the oly. otherwise the sigma is perfect.

 

[Bhupinder2002]

I have read that the O60 is a world class macro that rivals any other systems best, but I was wondering how it compares to the Sigma 60 for regular shooting. I'm considering a lens in this FL, but I have never shot macro. I like the idea of having a lens as good in its niche as the O60, but its over twice as expensive, and I might never shoot macro (or I might discover I love it). So... lets hear some opinions :smile:

Oh, and what sort of accessories do you need for macro shooting, Special lights? And any experience with the GX7s IBIS with this lens?

I have both and I love the rendering and sharpness of Sigma more than Olympus .I have yet to do proper comparison but IMHO , Sigma 60 mm 2.8 is the best MFT for the price we pay . If u are not interested in macro then go for Sigma .
Cheers

 

[GFFPhoto]

Thanks all. The focus speed info is the clincher for me. I'll go for the sigma

 

[Bhupinder2002]

Thanks all. The focus speed info is the clincher for me. I'll go for the sigma

Did I mention that sigma is half the size of Olympus? I like small lenses for our system.

 

[letsgofishing]

I've got the Sig 60 which I'm very happy with - pin sharp and a bargain price.
Use the 12--40 for macro....

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[rbelyell]

you can choose your art tools based on objective numbers, thats fine. or you can evaluate based on how the lens renders. some lenses, a minority really, have a special 'character'--something you cant quite define, certainly not with numbers. i like m4/3 alot, but there are only a very few lenses that have that certain 'something', imo. youd put the panny 25 in there, maybe the oly 75, and im sure im missing another 1 or 2. imo, the oly 60 has this character in spades. it has what i describe as a film-like quality. its a little dreamy and glowy for portraits, while being quite sharp at the same time. i hardly ever use it for macro, though when i do, its stellar. it has a zeiss-like subject 'pop' when you shoot it correctly.

what im talking about is subjective. sometimes you buy a lens despite the numbers because it makes beautiful images. imo, the oly 60 is that kind of lens. and dont be afraid of AF 'speed' or that its not a1.2 lens. i havent found it much slower than other lenses or cameras ive used. and in 90% of common situations the only thing a superfast lens gets you is mostly crappy pictures with way too much of the subject oof.

not that theyre the greatest pix in the world, cause theyre not, but take a look here

https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=62939

just to see how the lens renders, how versatile it is, how beautifully a 2.8 max ap can work in low light, and the lovely bokeh it can generate in good light.

 

[GFFPhoto]

Nice shots Rbelyell. I see what you mean about it having a different character than most lenses. I have read that it's a top notch macro. Ming Thein, who often pays the rent with macro shots, says it is world class. It would be interesting to see some bokeh examples that aren't trees.The bokeh looks a bit jittery and nervous, but a jumble of crisscrossing branches will often do that.

 

[broody]

Both are so good I can't imagine anyone would feel disappointed in owning either. IMO, it depends on what you want to pay for, and how much.

 

[rbelyell]

well, the dog shot has water as background. i personally found the bokeh very smooth, similar to my leica-c 90.

 

[GFFPhoto]

well, the dog shot has water as background.

That does look good

 

[spatulaboy]

Well I'm a recent convert to the Sigma 60, I am really enjoying it! The Oly 60 is arguably the best macro lens for the system, but you will be paying twice the price for it. If you want to just dabble in macro, there are more economical ways to try it out. I do almost all my macros with my legacy Minolta lens and get great results.

 

[GFFPhoto]

I ordered the Sigma. Seemed like an unbeatable value at the price. If I ever delve into macro, the O60 will find a place in my bag!

 

[tjdean01]

While I've never had either, the Sigma seems to have excellent reviews, and you can always use some inexpensive tubes to find out if you like macro or not.

*EDIT*: I've removed the link, as the test contained within was wildly inaccurate (supposedly testing the Sigma's sharpness from f1.8 ).

If only that $250 diamond-slicingly sharp Sigma 60 were a 1.8. Things would be a little different around here!


Either way, a 60mm lens that's sharp at f2.8 is a pretty good lens. Look to the past where a 35mm-equivalent 135mm f2.8 was considered very fast. I have the Sigma 30 and it gets a lot of use. Not as good of bokeh at 30mm as you'll get at 60 but my shots look great too. I'm actually considering the 60 myself. If I see a sale for as cheap as I got the 30 it'll be mine!

 

[tjdean01]

While I've never had either, the Sigma seems to have excellent reviews, and you can always use some inexpensive tubes to find out if you like macro or not.

*EDIT*: I've removed the link, as the test contained within was wildly inaccurate (supposedly testing the Sigma's sharpness from f1.8 ).

If only that $250 diamond-slicingly sharp Sigma 60 were a 1.8. Things would be a little different around here!


Either way, a 60mm lens that's sharp at f2.8 is a pretty good lens. Look to the past where a 35mm-equivalent 135mm f2.8 was considered very fast. I have the Sigma 30 and it gets a lot of use. Not as good of bokeh at 30mm as you'll get at 60 but my shots look great too. I'm actually considering the 60 myself. If I see a sale for as cheap as I got the 30 it'll be mine!

 

[chonbhoy]

On the O60 setting the focus limiter will speed up normal shooting and MF with a steady movement or a macro rail will get you the best shots for true 1:1 reproduction. It's not the best for candid shots but the Oly has a bag of tricks vs a normal 60mm prime (i've never owned the Sigma) All else i can say is that I have the 75 and rarely find myself wishing i was using the 60 for closer quarters so the O60 has it's separate uses for when you have more time to take a shot and it can do more than a normal prime. The IQ between the S60 and O60 from what i've read is about the same. Do you invest more money in a more versatile lens knowing that at some point you'll want a longer FL like the 75 for better IQ and better light gathering or give the cheaper sigma a go and use a diopter for macro?? Lens rental could be the key.