Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
55 of 55 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent Macro despite limitations, October 28, 2005
I had a Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro and it was working quite well for me but I longed for a little more working distance. When Sigma came out with the 150mm f2.8 Macro, I tried researching it but couldn't find much info because it was such a new lens, I found the MTF charts on the Sigma Website and it was amazing. This lens was very close to the performance of the Sigma 180mm macro and Canon's famed 180mm f3.5 L. So I went ahead and bought it. It was a little pricy but I thought I could always return it if I didn't like it.
My first impressions taking the lens out of the box was very positive. It was quite compact for the focal length and was very well made. It balanced quite well on my 20D. I never liked Sigma's EX finish but I could live with it. The EX finish looks cheap to me,particularly the golden ring, and the EX badge, but it's better than Sigma's old design. The only thing I like about the EX finish is that it seems very durable. Even after heavy use there are no marks or scratches on the lens body and every time I wipe the lens body with a damp tissue, it just looks like brand new. The focus ring is nicely ribbed and wide but it didn't have the kind of damping Canon L lenses have, so it felt a little loose. The tripod ring is made of the same material as the lens body itself, but it didn't feel as smooth as the Canon's L like the 70-200 2.8IS and the 300mm f4 IS. One advantage Sigma's tripod rings have over Canon is you don't have to take it off the tripod to remove the lens. You just pull a knob and the ring opens allowing you to remove the lens. This is good if you have it all set on the tripod and want to quickly remove it for some hand held shots.
As far as it's optical performance is concerned, it's an absolute gem. When I review the pictures from this lens, all worries and niggles about price, finish etc dissapear and I'm glad I own it. I compared it against Canon's 135mm F2L which is one of Canon's sharpest lens,and this lens compares very favourably against it. In fact it is just as sharp as the 135mm at comparable apertures. But the 135mm is a stop faster and has faster focussing but that's a whole different story.
In short the lens is everything one can expect out of a macro. Excellent build, very sharp, good colors, excellent bokeh (out of focus areas). What else would one want? The focussing is slow, but it's a macro lens and that's how macro lenses are. The minimum aperture is 22 which may deter some, but I don't shoot slower than 22 anyway because of diffraction limitations.
This lens is just perfect for it's intended purpose. Needless to say, I sold my Canon 100mm in a jiffy.
|
|
|
27 of 28 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Sigma gets an A on this one., March 27, 2007
I have the Nikon 60 Micro lens and wanted something with more working distance. In the Photozone.de test, it was amazing. Very high resolution, even at f/2.8. And very low CA's(chromatic abberations). So I bought it and does it deliver that kind of performance? Yes it does! Sharpness and color redention was stunning. And at 1:1(life size on the negative or digital sensor), there's more than 7 inches working distance. Build quality is excellent. It's mostly metal construction. The focus ring has a nice dampened feel to it. The new Sigma rear caps fit tighter and do not come off. But they're a little harder to mount. About autofocus performance, it's fast, but hunted in low light with the Nikon D50 while shooting motocross. But that's a weakness of the camera body, not the lens. On the F100(a high end Nikon film camera), it was lightning fast and dead on. Yes it is a full frame lens, so it can be used on 35mm cameras also. There's a tripod collar and it makes for a well balanced setup when on a tripod. The collar is removable making it easier to do handheld shooting. The maximum aperture of f/2.8 allows more flexibility in low light. The filter thread is 72mm, and filters this big get expensive. It is a good all around telephoto-sports, portraits, landscapes...you name it. Just because it's labeled a macro doesn't mean a lens is good for macro only! It's not cheap, but if you want a solid performer that's great for all occasions, this just may what you're looking for.
|
|
|
20 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
One of the best mid-tele macros, December 10, 2007
Sigma's EX line is the Sigma equivilant to Canon's L series. These are Sigma's top of the line lenses and the 150/2.8 Macro is no exception.
This is one of the finest mid-tele macro lenses out there. I've been able to get some incredibly sharp shots with this lens. The 2.8 aperture means you can do some low-light shooting and that you'll blur out everything but your subject. Depending on how close your subject is and how good you are at focusing, you might blur out some of the subject at 2.8 as well.
This is a great lens for product photography to macro bug shots to mid-range tele subjects. Just don't expect fast focusing. Using the focus limter switch helps for tele shots, but seems to make things slower in macro. (Normally, using the limiter should HELP when shooting macro!)
The pluses are: included case, strap and hood. The 2.8 and incredible sharpness. The focus limiter switch. And the very decent working distance.
The minuses are essentially slow focus and hunting when shooting macro. Some purists would suggest you should be using MF instead of AF for macro anyway and they have a point. My old eyes don't see as well as they used to so AF is important to me.
In conclusion, if you're looking to get a mid-length telephoto lens, especially for macro, you can hardly do better, particularly for the money. Sure, the Canon 180/3.5L will give you better color and contrast, but at nearly three times the money.
This is a great lens!
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
