Sigma Brushes

[jenee.sum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by reem2790 *awaits a review from the brave soul who bought it*

placed my order last night. will try it when i get it and let you guys know. my mac 109 sheds too much. but it is amazing, which is why i still use it. hopefully the SS109 won't be a disappointment, and hopefully much better than the mac 109. i noticed how flat topped it looks like in the pic, but i really wanted to try it.

 

[christianad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by malaviKat LOL Nicholle... you and me, girl.

i bought it the first day it was released because i was extremely curious to see how it compared to the first ss109 that was released. i actually just received it in the mail today.

it's only a tad different than the first sigma ss109 that was released. the only difference is that the top of the brush head is flatter than the first ss109's that was released. the density is about the same between the two sigma brushes, so it's still not as dense as a MAC 109.

i find that since the top of the brush head is flatter, it functions more similarly to the MAC 109. the first ss109 that came out was too tapered and dome shaped in comparison to the actual MAC 109. the picture of the new ss109 on the website doesn't really depict it accurately. it is very flat on the top, but the edges do taper off a tad bit nicer and the brush doesn't just have strong/harsh edges. the brush head size of the ss109's (both old and new) is smaller in comparison to the MAC one. it's probably because there are less hairs in the sigma one than the MAC one. now i wouldn't say this brush is horribly flimsy, but it's NOT as dense as the MAC one. i just want to make that clear so that people don't get misled.

i find the density only really affects the application of foundations (be it liquid or cream) but not really powders (it works very nicely for blush, highlighting, and contouring). but the flatter head on this new ss109 actually does make it a little better at applying liquid foundation (compared to the first ss109) and i am actually pleased with how it applied my foundation today. also keep in mind it's brand new since i barely received it today, and it does fluff out a bit and get a tiny bit denser after "breaking it in", but even then it's not quite as dense or big (brush head size) as my MAC one (based on my experience with my first ss109). it's not a bad comparable... NOT exact... but not bad.

i'd say the sigma ss109 (the new one) is a wee bit more comparable to the MAC 109 (in performance, not appearance); the only difference really being the density. if you already have a MAC 109, you might not like the Sigma one as much because of the difference in densities. but i think that if you're looking for a back-up and/or travel dedicated 109 that functions similarly for a fraction of the price, the sigma one is definitely worth checking out. also, if you can't afford the MAC 109, this is definitely a good brush to substitute it because it can do the things that a MAC 109 does. it's just one of those brushes that if you don't have the MAC one, you'll be very happy with the sigma one. if you have the MAC one, you'll find it ok (probably not as good as the MAC one) but a good back-up/travel brush.

i'll post a picture of my mac 109, old sigma ss109, and new sigma ss109 as soon as i get my camera back. my bf highjacked it for the weekend. =P

 

[malaviKat]

^^ great review! very thorough.

I am considering the 109 as a backup or to use for contouring/powder products. I love my MAC 109 so I doubt it will replace it...

 

[malaviKat]

Did anybody notice the price increase in Sigma brushes in the past month or so?

I think that's kinda crazy... I still think they're worth it because to buy similar brushes through MAC would cost far more but I think this reviewer sums up her reaction to the price hike quite nicely...

~ Sigma Makeup Brush, Price Increase ~ Kristine Marie Makeup Artistry

I am still trying to figure out if Sigma actually double bills you for shipping. (I've never ordered 2 single brushes at a time, as an example, but whenever I put it in my cart they're listed as separate shipping charges. I cannot fathom $11 to ship 2 brushes if it costs $14 to ship 12!)

 

[jenee.sum]

^^^ s/h fee is dependent on weight. even if it's 2 brushes, it should not be a dollar less of shipping the whole set! email them. sounds nuts to me!

and yes i did notice the price increase. i thought i just misread the price in the past. guess i was wrong.

 

[malaviKat]

actually, when i thought about it i remembered buying the brush roll (empty) and one brush when i first tried them out. (I'd been looking for a brush roll forever for my MAC brushes). I'm fairly certain I was charged for each product... I should pull that receipt out and take a look at it again.

I emailed them this time...I'm just waiting to hear back. I want a bunch of the single brushes but to pay 3-4x in shipping is just plain stupid to me. (I should have protested the first time. lesson learned.)

 

[jenee.sum]

^^^ let me know what they say! TIA!

 

[L1LMAMAJ]

did the price go up!? i could've sworn the full complete brush set was 79 plus the roll and now it's 89!?

 

[nichollecaren]

strups.

edit:I did some research, the 109 is actually teh same price as it was back in may...as is the 150...I dont know the prices of the brush kits before, but it would really be silly to raise the costs of kits and not individual brushes.

 

[malaviKat]

Yep the price went up...

When I bought the full set (without brush roll) it was $64.. now it's $69... and well, you guys know the rest. I think some of the individual brushes went up in price too.

And while I don't want to jump on this particular bandwagon.. I really do have to wonder whether the price increase is subsidizing all of the giveaways on YouTube/blogs....

 

[malaviKat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jenee.sum ^^^ let me know what they say! TIA!

This was their email back... (their second email because even after the first time, their clarification wasn't logical...)

"The approximate cost of shipping 2 brushes to Canada is $7. This is merely an estimate, as the exact price of shipping is determined by the weight of the package. To determine the cost, you may add products to cart, proceed to check out, and click on the link 'calculate total order amount'. For domestic shipping, enter your zip-code. For international shipping costs, click on the link 'shipping outside the U.S.?' and select your country."

For what it's worth, I save my receipts and when I ordered the 150 and empty brush roll I paid $14 in shipping. So yeah... I'm not totally convinced that what they've said above will work.

 

[malaviKat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nichollecaren strups. edit:I did some research, the 109 is actually teh same price as it was back in may...as is the 150...I dont know the prices of the brush kits before, but it would really be silly to raise the costs of kits and not individual brushes.

I think (but I can't remember) that the 182 went up...

 

[widow1]

I have to say my issue is Sigmas obviously lack of ability to substantiate the price increases while it continues to just give product away.

It is a huge smack in the face to real customers who earn their money and make a CHOICE to spend it at Sigma to have our prices and shipping marked up without any explanation, warning, or reasoning. Sliding it in there and hoping it will be lost in the barrage of giving away hundreds if not thousands of dollars of product to others is a concept that is apparently acceptable to them, and those who continue to shop there... Advertising/promo expenses with any other company have to be absorbed by someone and Sigmas case, it seems to be the paying customers.

Some Youtube Gurus owe you guys a thank you for all the business that has afforded them continued free product supplies as well as gifts for their friends and family.

Personally, if they said "Hey We improved something" or if there was a boost in the quality of customer service ( less waiting times etc), improvements on consistency ( product or service) or note on the site beforehand noting an upcoming change due to *insertreasonhere*, it may be been easier to stomach. How hard would some notice have been really? They send email reminders almost DAILY now to display products that have been there all along and claim that as "NEWS".

NEWS is new! Email battery is kin to spam.

And silence is permission for them to continue to raise prices on products and shipping without improvement to quality or service until you are at a point where you are better off buying your MAC brushes to begin with.

 

[nera_pooh]

I need yours advice...for applying liquid poundation (i need better camouflage since I have larger pores and small wrinkles) is it better to take ss109 or ss187?

 

[nichollecaren]

Quote:

Originally Posted by widow1 I have to say my issue is Sigmas obviously lack of ability to substantiate the price increases while it continues to just give product away. It is a huge smack in the face to real customers who earn their money and make a CHOICE to spend it at Sigma to have our prices and shipping marked up without any explanation, warning, or reasoning. Sliding it in there and hoping it will be lost in the barrage of giving away hundreds if not thousands of dollars of product to others is a concept that is apparently acceptable to them, and those who continue to shop there... Advertising/promo expenses with any other company have to be absorbed by someone and Sigmas case, it seems to be the paying customers. Some Youtube Gurus owe you guys a thank you for all the business that has afforded them continued free product supplies as well as gifts for their friends and family. Personally, if they said "Hey We improved something" or if there was a boost in the quality of customer service ( less waiting times etc), improvements on consistency ( product or service) or note on the site beforehand noting an upcoming change due to *insertreasonhere*, it may be been easier to stomach. How hard would some notice have been really? They send email reminders almost DAILY now to display products that have been there all along and claim that as "NEWS". NEWS is new! Email battery is kin to spam. And silence is permission for them to continue to raise prices on products and shipping without improvement to quality or service until you are at a point where you are better off buying your MAC brushes to begin with.

I agree for the most part.

While I dont think they were obligated to inform us of the price increase (MAC raises their prices annually---silently), I do believe that the increase is too soon. The prices are still good, but this suggests that the prices will continue to creep up-add that to the UNREASONABLE shipping policies and costs and before you know it the brushes will be overpriced. It happens on ebay all the time. You win an item for 2.00 and the shipping is 10.00. Its the 'hidden cost' aspect of the billing that I have an issue with.

As for the 'news' ...I reported them as spam LOL

 

[malaviKat]

^^ It sounds like you need a good primer underneath your foundation. Remember, foundation does not change your skin's texture but will cover changes in tint or tone.

 

[jenee.sum]

nera_pooh: what malavikat said....but also, if you're using a thick foundation like the Studio Sculpt, then you might like the 109 better. I find the 187 to be better with thinner or more liquid-y foundations since it's harder for the white fibers to buff in thick consistencies.

Review on NEW SS109:

Ok so I've been using it for a few days now. The new ss109 is the same length as the mac 109. I washed it as soon as i got it to see if it would fan out as much or more than the mac 109. The one i got fanned out more, and is more fluffy. Hence, it's not as dense as the mac 109. However, it's not to say the SS109 is not dense. It is, but it should probably be more dense since the 109 is suppose to be a really dense brush. Even when i applied it to my face, it didn't feel as stiff...it felt more soft?

So for those who like to buff their foundation in with a 109, you might prefer the mac one more, as denser brushes are better for buffing in foundations. If you just stipple your foundation on, then i think either one will work. I didn't notice a difference in terms of using it for stippling foundation on; only for buffing.

I think for the price difference, the SS109 is workable. It's definitely not a terrible brush. If you have a mac 109 already, you may want to stick with your mac one, but if you're looking for a cheap alternative, then the SS109 is a good choice. Again, the sigma one is $14 US, while the mac one is $38.50 CDN - sorry! I only have the Canadian price for the mac 109. With a 20 something dollar difference, i say why not try the sigma 109 if you cannot afford the mac one.

OH, and about the flat top, it's not as dead flat as the picture shows. when it's all puffed out, it's just as flat as the mac one i find - well at least the one i got is.

HTH!

 

[theheidis]

I've had these for a while now - they are ok, but get MAC if you can, and rely on these as travel, extra sets or if you can't afford MAC. The SS168 is soft, but really floppy, good only for blush not contour, IMO....I say so because every comment or video I've seen on this say it's wonderful, soft and as good as MAC, but it's super floppy so no control....so one of my least favorites.

 

[malaviKat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jenee.sum nera_pooh: what malavikat said....but also, if you're using a thick foundation like the Studio Sculpt, then you might like the 109 better. I find the 187 to be better with thinner or more liquid-y foundations since it's harder for the white fibers to buff in thick consistencies. Review on NEW SS109: Ok so I've been using it for a few days now. The new ss109 is the same length as the mac 109. I washed it as soon as i got it to see if it would fan out as much or more than the mac 109. The one i got fanned out more, and is more fluffy. Hence, it's not as dense as the mac 109. However, it's not to say the SS109 is not dense. It is, but it should probably be more dense since the 109 is suppose to be a really dense brush. Even when i applied it to my face, it didn't feel as stiff...it felt more soft? So for those who like to buff their foundation in with a 109, you might prefer the mac one more, as denser brushes are better for buffing in foundations. If you just stipple your foundation on, then i think either one will work. I didn't notice a difference in terms of using it for stippling foundation on; only for buffing. I think for the price difference, the SS109 is workable. It's definitely not a terrible brush. If you have a mac 109 already, you may want to stick with your mac one, but if you're looking for a cheap alternative, then the SS109 is a good choice. Again, the sigma one is $14 US, while the mac one is $38.50 CDN - sorry! I only have the Canadian price for the mac 109. With a 20 something dollar difference, i say why not try the sigma 109 if you cannot afford the mac one. OH, and about the flat top, it's not as dead flat as the picture shows. when it's all puffed out, it's just as flat as the mac one i find - well at least the one i got is. HTH!

Do you think the SS109 will work okay to contour with? (i use the mac or ss 168 right now for contouring, but sometimes i want a different shape to my contour brush). it's too bad the 109 isn't that great for buffing foundation... I LOVE the mac 109 for that... and didn't want to spend another $40CND!

 

[jenee.sum]

^^^ yea i think it'll be ok for contouring. i forgot to mention that the head of the ss109 is bigger than the mac; not in the length of the bristles, but from a birds eye view, the bristles have a bigger circumference. am i making sense?
so for someone who has a small head/face like me, you may prefer the mac 109 since it's smaller. but if you have a larger head/face surface, the bigger ss109 won't be a problem. it's still firm enough to contour IMO, and it's not TOO TOO big. just a little bigger.

--- OK so i just measured the circumference of the mac 109 and ss109. measurements are approximates cuz the bristles do not create a perfect circle if you know what i mean.
mac 109 = 2.7 cm
ss109 = 3 cm

i don't know if that was helpful, but hope it was. again, everything i said is my opinion. i think it's a workable brush considering it's so much cheaper than the mac one.