Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO..$1G+ at B&H in stock

[carauction]

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=106306&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

Mike

 

[CraigH]

I think I'd consider the new OS version of this lens, but I really need to know if it performs as well as my old version. It often seems that with 3rd party glass, the optics don't seem to perform as well when they change the optical formula to include stabilization.

I certainly hope this is not true with this classic. Persoally, I think the Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro might be the best of class for Sigma lenses and might be for all macros.

 

[carauction]

I think I'd consider the new OS version of this lens, but I really need to know if it performs as well as my old version. It often seems that with 3rd party glass, the optics don't seem to perform as well when they change the optical formula to include stabilization.

I certainly hope this is not true with this classic. Persoally, I think the Sigma 150 f/2.8 APO Macro might be the best of class for Sigma lenses and might be for all macros.

Interesting insight. I do recall that when Sigma changed their 70-200 to 'Macro', many thought that the lens took a second seat to the older non-macro version.

Not only did I like the original version's optics, but it's resistance to fringing and C/A as well. I did use it as a telephoto Prime. Focus acquisition and tracking, albeit second to Nikon by any stretch, was still fairly decent. Wondering if overall focus capabilities might be improved in this new version.

Mike

 

[MParker]

I bought the first version just days after its introduction. It is exceptional on DX and FX formats. The MTF charts on Sigma's site indicate that the performance for the new version should be quite good though the curves for the original are a bit better.

If OS/VR is important to you I think the new lens will be excellent on full frame or DX just like the original. OTOH, you can save some $$$ buying the first version.

 

[CraigH]

The MTF charts on Sigma's site indicate that the performance for the new version should be quite good though the curves for the original are a bit better.

If OS/VR is important to you I think the new lens will be excellent on full frame or DX just like the original.

You see, that's the issue for me. I'd not want it to drop at all and OS isn't important at all for macro, of course. I use this lens for most anything as well as non-macro and OS might be useful though not a panacea.

Photozone.de just did an FX review on the old version and it was superb. Their DX review was great as well. It's a pleasure to see glass that performs as well on FX as DX. It's rare. If the OS version compares closely enough in the reviews, I'm certainly a player. I bought mine when they were $550 at Adorama. After the reviews, the price shot up significantly. :frown:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/624-sigma15028ff

I think it's equal or better than Nikon's 105 VR.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[MParker]

The MTF's really are just slightly different with the edges being where the difference is. You really can't go wrong with either I suspect.

 

[nuclearjock]

My 200 f/4 micro is never leaving my bag.

 

[Thorsten]

My 200 f/4 micro is never leaving my bag.

Same here. I bought it when it was $1300.

 

[CraigH]

My 200 f/4 micro is never leaving my bag.

That's the only one I've not tried. I've always heard it was superb. I'd consider getting one, but I use my macro lens as short fast bird tele about as often or more often than a macro lens. I like the HSM and f/2.8 of the Sigma. I don't know if it is as good as the 200 f/4 but if it isn't, it can't be far behind.

 

[MParker]

I've used all the micro-Nikkors currently available and I think the Sigma 150/2.8 is the best macro I've used in a Nikon mount. It's hard to find a bad macro lens so nearly any of those in current production (and most out of production) would be good choices. Put the Sigma 1.4 TC on the 150 and it's still very close to what the micro-Nikkor 200/4 can produce. Still, unless you make very large prints, it might be difficult to tell them apart without nitpicking. Where the Sigma really shines IMO is its performance as a general purpose lens as well as a macro lens. Not many macro lenses do well as GP lenses.

 

[godfather]

My 200 f/4 micro is never leaving my bag.

Me too!

I have both the Sigma 150 and Nikon 200. I almost always choose the 200 first.

 

[Smiert Spionam]

I've used all the micro-Nikkors currently available and I think the Sigma 150/2.8 is the best macro I've used in a Nikon mount. It's hard to find a bad macro lens so nearly any of those in current production (and most out of production) would be good choices. Put the Sigma 1.4 TC on the 150 and it's still very close to what the micro-Nikkor 200/4 can produce. Still, unless you make very large prints, it might be difficult to tell them apart without nitpicking. Where the Sigma really shines IMO is its performance as a general purpose lens as well as a macro lens. Not many macro lenses do well as GP lenses.

I agree -- it's just a phenomenal lens, and remarkably flexible for different uses. The only drawback I've found is that due to its internal focusing design, magnification shifts along with focus when working in the macro range. It's a fairly minor issue, and one which is caused by the same design that makes it so nice and compact to work with in other circumstances. I could see someone preferring something like the 200/4 for dedicated macro use for that reason -- but the 150/2.8 is second to none optically.

 

[pictureted]

Does anyone know whether the new Sigma 150 will work with Nikon TCs?

I like using my TC1.4 on the 105/2.8 VR and getting beyond 1:1. I'd hate to have to buy new TCs for the Sigma.

OS is not much use with macro shooting, but Nikon's 200/4 macro would be more useful for hummingbirds if it had OS. I wonder how the Sigma is as a 210/4.

 

[MParker]

I wonder how the Sigma is as a 210/4.

Original Sigma 150 with Sigma 1.4 TC, D90, f5.6 at 1/125th, ISO 400

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[LSUDVM]

someone at potn has the new version:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1068943

 

[Cryptic]

It often seems that with 3rd party glass, the optics don't seem to perform as well when they change the optical formula to include stabilization.

So far, Sigma has been exceptional in this area: the 17-50, 70-200, and (presumably) this lens.

 

[lanthier]

Does anyone know whether the new Sigma 150 will work with Nikon TCs?

I like using my TC1.4 on the 105/2.8 VR and getting beyond 1:1. I'd hate to have to buy new TCs for the Sigma.

OS is not much use with macro shooting, but Nikon's 200/4 macro would be more useful for hummingbirds if it had OS. I wonder how the Sigma is as a 210/4.

No, they will not work with Nikon TCs.

I pick mine up from the office tomorrow Will report on my initial impressions...

 

[pictureted]

Thanks Rich. Looking forward to seeing your results.

 

[lanthier]

Picked it up today and have shot a few images. So far, I LIKE! The addition of OS is great for handheld close-up shooting and the lens appears to retain all of the good features of the previous. It has been a while since I shot with the non-OS version but I am again impressed by the size/weight of the lens. I have so snaps to upload later when I get a chance. In the process of migrating some computer systems so it might take a while...

 

[lanthier]

Some sample images posted in https://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?p=3615199#post3615199this thread.