I think it's a 105mm as is Sigma's tradition? Funny that all the manufacturers fall into one of the three groups when it comes to doing a midrange macro: either a 90, 100 or 105mm. Will anyone want to create a 95mm lens someday?
Well, there's a couple of day 1 reviews on youtube, and that lens seems very good. Hopefully, it will come to the RF-mount sooner rather than latter.
I dunno but the Sigma macros always felt a bit clinical to me.
I find 120mm equiv to be the best focal length for macro lenses.
The 60mm macro from Olympus is still my favorite macro. Its IQ is great, its size is minuscule and f5.6 equivalent is perfectly fine.
(10-02-2020, 08:11 AM)thxbb12 Wrote: [ -> ]I find 120mm equiv to be the best focal length for macro lenses.
The 60mm macro from Olympus is still my favorite macro. Its IQ is great, its size is minuscule and f5.6 equivalent is perfectly fine.
No idea what focal length the Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 Di macro has at close up/MFD, but for me the "144mm" FF equivalent (on Canon ASP-C) was totally not ok. Quite a bit longer, or shorter, did work for me (like 55mm x 1.6 = 88mm, 35 x 1.6 = 56mm, 24 x 1.6 = 38mm, 200 x 1.6 = 320mm).