Sigma 180mm F2.8 OS Macro lens - $1700

[Kerbouchard]

Tyler, EVERY single lens you've posted there are what focal length? That's right. 90 to 105mm you know why? Because they're not long telephoto, they're considered "macro" and "general use" like for portraits and such. For short focal length it makes sense to make it 2.8 because you'll also be able to use it for things other than extreme closeup 1:1 macro shots, which can't be said about a lens that is almost 200mm. Try going around with 180mm as "general use" lens...

180mm macro is VERY specialized. Maybe not as much as lenses like MP-E 65mm but still. Now, why would a very specialized macro lens of telephoto focal length get f/2.8 considering it will never be used at anything that big, I am not sure.

I had used my Sigma 150 2.8 Macro at 2.8 fairly often for portraits. Now that I have the 120-300 2.8, I prefer it, but for a time, it was one of my goto lenses for outdoor portraits.

So what's your point, I am not arguing about 150mm, I am arguing about 180

I am not arguing at all. I am simply saying that having 2.8 on a longer focal length, even if it is primarily a macro lens, still increases marketshare. It allows the people who want a dual purpose lens to experiment with two different types of photography.

Now, on the other hand, I still don't know why they came out with this lens since the 150 2.8 OS macro already fills this range, nicely.

 

[sovietdoc]

I had used my Sigma 150 2.8 Macro at 2.8 fairly often for portraits. Now that I have the 120-300 2.8, I prefer it, but for a time, it was one of my goto lenses for outdoor portraits.

So what's your point, I am not arguing about 150mm, I am arguing about 180

I am not arguing at all. I am simply saying that having 2.8 on a longer focal length, even if it is primarily a macro lens, still increases marketshare. It allows the people who want a dual purpose lens to experiment with two different types of photography.

Now, on the other hand, I still don't know why they came out with this lens since the 150 2.8 OS macro already fills this range, nicely.

I think it's like Derrel said, this is primarily aimed at Canon's EF 180mm. Actually that's the reason I got the sigma is because Canon's lens was so old and had no bells and whistles. I'd use their 100mm f/2.8L IS but I just need more range to work with, since for me macro has always been about insects. And because I shoot handheld a lot, not having any kind of "IS" at 180mm kinda like EF 180mm was not going to work at 1:1

 

[Derrel]

Yes...Canon's 180mm EF is old..and lacking in bells and whistles...it's vulnerable. It's a very,very logical lens to try and steal sales from...the 200mm Micro~Nikkor OTOH, is for a different "kind" of shooter...

 

[o hey tyler]

Tyler, EVERY single lens you've posted there are what focal length? That's right. 90 to 105mm you know why? Because they're not long telephoto, they're considered "macro" and "general use" like for portraits and such. For short focal length it makes sense to make it 2.8 because you'll also be able to use it for things other than extreme closeup 1:1 macro shots, which can't be said about a lens that is almost 200mm. Try going around with 180mm as "general use" lens...

...and your point? f/2.8 at 180mm is more useful than f/2.8 at 100mm. Especially if you're using a macro lens for general use, like oh, I don't know, Portraiture?!

 

[cgipson1]

The Nikon 200mm F/4.0 Macro is almost the same price. At F/4, and with no VR or AF-s. I would have loved to see this lens come out with a $999 price tag. It would have been flying off the shelves.

Mark

+

I h ave been hoping that Nikon would update the 200... that is the only reason I haven't bought one! lol!

 

[cgipson1]

Sigma announces pricing and availability for 180mm f/2.8 macro lens | Photo Rumors

Well, I've been long waiting for the announcement for the price of this lens. It's a dream macro lens, and would pair nicely as a nice portrait/telephoto lens as well. Beautiful. And it's quite sexy to look at, if I do say so. But, the $1700 is a bit of a punch to the stomach.

What are your opinions?

Do you think this will put the sticks to Nikon/Canon to come up with a competitor? If so, it will be hard to justify the price tag on those two..

Mark

It had better be a DAMN GOOD lens for that money... I have seen very few third party lenses I would pay that for. I think they are delusional....

That sucks.. I too, was waiting to see what this one would do!

Looks like I might look at picking up one of the older 180's... was waiting to see...

~$1k for the Sigma 85mm/1.4 was worth it for me over the Canon 85/1.8 or Canon 85/1.2.

Well... thought about that lens too, especially since I really like the 50mm 1.4 I have. But went with the Nikon instead... and love it!

 

[Markw]

I have the Sigma 85/1.4. I love it. It's a spectacular lens. But, it has a problem with color fringes in the bokeh. Green on top, magenta on the underside. Now, when you buy an 85/1.4, it's for the bokeh. And it's a shame it has this problem. I love the lens, but I would trade it for the Nikon counterpart (G) in a heartbeat.

Mark

 

[sovietdoc]

I've had a Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG prime before and although the corners weren't spectacular on FF, on crop, that lens was simply unbelievable. It actually had higher IQ in the center than Canon's more expensive 24mm's because canon optimizes their lens for average IQ cross both center and edges, while on that particular lens, sigma optimized it for the center, leaving the corners hanging. But on a crop it was fantastic.

 

[jake337]

What are your opinions?

1. f/2.8 - wtf what's the point of this on a macro lens? You're always going to be shooting at f/11 or smaller, not I am no pro in macro but I'm just confused by this

Gee, I don't know. It's not like there have been any f/2.8 macro lenses before, I only listed eight of them. They should just be made for f/11 and smaller just to minimize time in stopping down your aperture, right?

Amazon.com: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

Amazon.com: Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM 1-to-1 Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

Amazon.com: Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor Lens: Electronics

Amazon.com: Tokina AT-X 100mm f/2.8 PRO D Macro Lens for Canon EOS Digital and Film Cameras: Electronics

Amazon.com: Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP A/M 1:1 Macro Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

Amazon.com: Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro Lens for Canon SLR Camera: Electronics

Amazon.com: Sony 100mm f/2.8 Macro Lens for Sony Alpha Digital SLR Camera: Electronics

Amazon.com: Pentax 100mm f/2.8 WR D FA smc Macro Lens for Pentax Digital SLR Cameras: Electronics

It's not like anyone focus stacks anyways.

Also, having a fast f2.8 or larger aperture is great when attaching or stacking multiple extension tubes.

 

[jake337]

Tyler, EVERY single lens you've posted there are what focal length? That's right. 90 to 105mm you know why? Because they're not long telephoto, they're considered "macro" and "general use" like for portraits and such. For short focal length it makes sense to make it 2.8 because you'll also be able to use it for things other than extreme closeup 1:1 macro shots, which can't be said about a lens that is almost 200mm. Try going around with 180mm as "general use" lens...

180mm macro is VERY specialized. Maybe not as much as lenses like MP-E 65mm but still. Now, why would a very specialized macro lens of telephoto focal length get f/2.8 considering it will never be used at anything that big, I am not sure.

I walk around with my nikkor 180mm f2.8 ais as a general lens all the time my friend.

 

[jake337]

Shouldn't we be waiting for some test results and sample photos first anyways?