Returning my new Sigma 150mm 2.8 Macro....

[cgipson1]

Well macro lenses tend to always be slower in the AF department - heck I know my 70-200mm blows my 150mm out of the water in the AF department; but then again I've read some good things about canons new 100mm IS macro and its AF speed; though I've never tested one to know if its in keeping with the speed of a regular lens.

I am not worried about speed as much as accuracy.... If the Nikkor 200 is anywhere near as accurate as my 70-200, I would love it. I was really hoping that the Sigma would do that... I was really disappointed, believe me. I know another copy might be perfect, but now I am worried.. and unsure about it.

Really, I considered keeping the Sigma.. since I will use it primarily for macro anyway (manual focus).. but I had read that it does well as a portrait lens also, and was hoping to use it for that also. I really love the IQ.. but not sure now. My eyes are no longer good enough for really good manual focusing past a few feet, so I really need that AF to be dead on. I will say the OS worked well.. I was able to get good shots several stops under what I would consider "sure" without the OS.

 

[Infinite_Day]

An updated version (assuming one ever comes out in the near future) of the 200mm micro that is AF-S will probably auto-focus well but the current model is not going to be blazing quick. Most of the time I manual focus on macro - it's just easier to get the exact part of the image you want in focus right. I would suspect that's the exact reason why Nikon hasn't updated the 200mm micro - why fix it if it isn't broke and most people manual focus it anyway? I'd love to have one as well, though...

 

[cgipson1]

An updated version (assuming one ever comes out in the near future) of the 200mm micro that is AF-S will probably auto-focus well but the current model is not going to be blazing quick. Most of the time I manual focus on macro - it's just easier to get the exact part of the image you want in focus right. I would suspect that's the exact reason why Nikon hasn't updated the 200mm micro - why fix it if it isn't broke and most people manual focus it anyway? I'd love to have one as well, though...

I agree.. manual focus is the only way to go for macro! I am just hoping to take advantage of the awesome IQ the 200 has for a long portrait lens also. Don't mind if it is a little slow.. i just want it accurate and reliable in AF. It would probably be like 90% macro anyway.. but hey, why not use it if I can. I would also like the extra few inches away from the subject that this lens gives, even a bit more than the Sigma 150 / 180 series.

 

[Markw]

The difference between the 150 and 180 macros is all but negligible, and the difference between 180 and 200 macros is even more negligible. But the difference between the 150 and 200 macros is well worth it. Just remember, it's going to be much harder to focus the 200 than the 150. The 150 is an F/2.8. The 200 is an F/4. With a macro lens, you lose light as you close in the distance anyhow. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but just say the Sigma turns into an F/4.5. The Nikkor will turn into an F/6.3 at 1:1. Hope it has VR. That, combined with the extra working distance (camera shake will be much worse), it's going to be much harder to focus with the Nikkor. The F/4 will also mean you're limited with portraits. Not that you'd use the 150 at F/2.8, and the 200 at F/4 will likely give you the same effect as the 150 at 2.8, but it's still a whole stop difference.

Just a thought. I've contemplated turning in my Sigma 180/3.5 for the Nikkor 200/4 on multiple occasions, but I do think I'll actually trade it for the 150/2.8OS eventually. Probably when Macro season comes back around, or just after christmas. The extra stop and OS is worth more to me than the extra 1" or so focusing distance, and I do think the 150OS will at least match the Nikkor 200 IQ. Hopefully it will do the same with the updated version (if one is announced in the next year timeframe with TWO flooded plants).

Mark

 

[cgipson1]

The difference between the 150 and 180 macros is all but negligible, and the difference between 180 and 200 macros is even more negligible. But the difference between the 150 and 200 macros is well worth it. Just remember, it's going to be much harder to focus the 200 than the 150. The 150 is an F/2.8. The 200 is an F/4. With a macro lens, you lose light as you close in the distance anyhow. I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but just say the Sigma turns into an F/4.5. The Nikkor will turn into an F/6.3 at 1:1. Hope it has VR. That, combined with the extra working distance (camera shake will be much worse), it's going to be much harder to focus with the Nikkor. The F/4 will also mean you're limited with portraits. Not that you'd use the 150 at F/2.8, and the 200 at F/4 will likely give you the same effect as the 150 at 2.8, but it's still a whole stop difference.

Just a thought. I've contemplated turning in my Sigma 180/3.5 for the Nikkor 200/4 on multiple occasions, but I do think I'll actually trade it for the 150/2.8OS eventually. Probably when Macro season comes back around, or just after christmas. The extra stop and OS is worth more to me than the extra 1" or so focusing distance, and I do think the 150OS will at least match the Nikkor 200 IQ. Hopefully it will do the same with the updated version (if one is announced in the next year timeframe with TWO flooded plants).

Mark

Some good thoughts, Mark! I have turned a lot of that over in my mind as well!

One thing I forgot to mention was the the Sigma 150 was only registering on my D7000 as a F3.2.. not a F2.8... no matter where the focus was... Sigma support said that was part of the hardware failure.

 

[Markw]

Wow. They must have really thrown your lens through the ringer before they sent it out. I can't imagine you'd have all of those, or any of those, really, if you got another copy. Keep us updated! :thumbsup:

mark

 

[jake337]

This was the new OS version.. Sigma support said it could be repaired under warranty... but I returned it. It was buggy...

It's a macro lens - its supposed to be buggy

That said I'd have just had it fixed under warranty
And if its within the return period you could have just had it exchanged for a new copy

Yes.. and I might go that way yet (getting another one)...The Sigma has wonderful IQ.. and if it hadn't had problems, it would stay in my bag.

But I really do have my heart set on the Nikkor 200!

My best, favorite lens is my Nikkor 70-200... it is always fast, sharp and focuses like no other lens I have ever had (remember the flying dragonflies? lol!) I just really feel like the Nikkor might be the way to go... I have always wanted one. If they bring out a new version of it, I will jump on it. In the meantime, I will use my trusty Tokina 100! (am I turning into a Nikon Snob? hmmmm! lol!)

Trusty+Tokina 100 fit together quite well! My copy of the Tokina 100mm f2.8 autofocuses more accurately than any other lens I own.

 

[cgipson1]

Trusty+Tokina 100 fit together quite well! My copy of the Tokina 100mm f2.8 autofocuses more accurately than any other lens I own.

Thats funny.. because I have never used my Tokina in AF.. only macro, while bug hunting! Good to hear though!