Sigma 180mm Macro

Puffy · 28th January 2003

Hi, have anyone used the above mentioned lens and can give some comments about its pros and cons, and how does it compare to the 200mm Micro Nikkor?

Is the nikkor worth twice the price of the sigma ?

Jed · 28th January 2003

The Sigma is a good lens, I've used it and contemplated buying it for some time, because I have a need for a longer macro (I currently have the 60mm). Optically it's very nice, a bit soft on the corners but it's not missed for the kind of macro work I do.

That said, because I have a 60, I'm saving up a bit longer to get the 200/4. Or if I cave in then I'd sooner get the 70-180 Nikkor, which is an extremely versatile macro optic.

megaweb · 28th January 2003

ya ... get zoom 70-180 Nikkor macro lens is better

it is much easy to control the magnification

Jed · 28th January 2003

Aiyah, the zoom not there to control the magnification lah... you still should be foot zooming. The zoom is there to control perspective.

megaweb · 28th January 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Jed
Aiyah, the zoom not there to control the magnification lah... you still should be foot zooming. The zoom is there to control perspective.

Puffy · 28th January 2003

Thanks Jed and Mega for their constructive comments. Appreciate your advises

Jed · 28th January 2003

Agree with Mega ultimately though, for its flexibility and your lens lineup, the 70-180 makes more sense. And it's cheaper than the 200/4 as well...

kn34 · 31st January 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by megaweb
ya ... get zoom 70-180 Nikkor macro lens is better

it is much easy to control the magnification

How much will this lens cost in sg?

Patricc · 3rd February 2003

The HSM version is a good lense. Borrowed my fren's lense to use. It's AF fast, silent, good optics, value for money. What else do u want. I agree that the Nikkor Micro is more versatile but if u r taking macro of moving things like butterflies etc, u will appreciate the fast AFing of the lense. Again, it also depend on the camera body. There might also be snob appeal on getting original lenses. Also the resell value is not as high. If u r budget strapped and would like to keep the lense for a long time, this is the ONE.

28th January 2003	#1
Puffy Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Tim Bat Tu Posts: 135	Sigma 180mm Macro Hi, have anyone used the above mentioned lens and can give some comments about its pros and cons, and how does it compare to the 200mm Micro Nikkor? Is the nikkor worth twice the price of the sigma ?

28th January 2003	#3
megaweb Moderator Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: East Posts: 8,106	ya ... get zoom 70-180 Nikkor macro lens is better it is much easy to control the magnification __________________ See my Photo Gallery at the Clubsnap \| Pbase

28th January 2003	#2
Jed Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,082	The Sigma is a good lens, I've used it and contemplated buying it for some time, because I have a need for a longer macro (I currently have the 60mm). Optically it's very nice, a bit soft on the corners but it's not missed for the kind of macro work I do. That said, because I have a 60, I'm saving up a bit longer to get the 200/4. Or if I cave in then I'd sooner get the 70-180 Nikkor, which is an extremely versatile macro optic.

3rd February 2003	#9
Patricc Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 80	The HSM version is a good lense. Borrowed my fren's lense to use. It's AF fast, silent, good optics, value for money. What else do u want. I agree that the Nikkor Micro is more versatile but if u r taking macro of moving things like butterflies etc, u will appreciate the fast AFing of the lense. Again, it also depend on the camera body. There might also be snob appeal on getting original lenses. Also the resell value is not as high. If u r budget strapped and would like to keep the lense for a long time, this is the ONE.