Is a Sigma 105 Macro as sharp as Canon 24-105L for studio use?

[microbike]

I've got both the Canon L 24-105 and the Sigma 105 Macro EX DG.

I've got to do a load of in studio shots of products, and traditionally would use the Sigma. But the Canon is new to me, and I was wondering if I could trust the quality of the Canon L at the 105 end, I could sell the 105 Sigma, which is only several months old. I've got to shoot things in size down to a toy aeroplane, up to an umbrella (extended). Shooting with a Canon 5D mkII.

Anyone got an opinion, or comparison?

 

[dazzajl]

My choice of those two would be the siggy. I've not used the 105 but I do have the 24-105 and the siggy 150 macro.

The canon is a great lens but it's more about the doing an awful lot of different jobs fairly well. The 105 is more about pure image quality.

 

[Canon Bob]

I'll back up Dazzajl on this one. I've had a Siggy 105 and I've got the Siggy 150 and the 24-105L. The 24-105 is a useful "stroll around the park" lens whilst product shots utilise the strengths of the prime macro...IMHO

Bob

 

[Chappers]

The Canon lens isn't a Macro as such so it does have problems if you are shooting smallish objects and have to get close. I've the 24-105 and the Canon 100mm Macro. both work well but when it comes to close work you'll be glad of the true macro option