Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2016 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?

  
 
birdied
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


While I love the 105mm macro, I am finding I really would like more working distance.

I am contemplating either the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 DG HSM APO Macro OS for Nikon or the Nikon 200mm f/4micro.

Of course there is a price difference, but I the weight looks about the same .

Does anyone have any experience with these lens and what are your thoughts.

Thanks for your help.

Birdie



Jul 26, 2016 at 12:39 PM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


The Sigma has been the darling of many here on Fred Miranda. The $700 price difference between Nikon/Sigma is nothing to sneeze at either.
I have the Tamron 180 that cost $739 because the Sigma was sold out everywhere and cost more. I have been happy with it for my (very) occasional forays into macro.



Jul 26, 2016 at 03:39 PM
Todd Warnke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


Used the non-OS Sigma 150 for several years and sold about 4-5 years back to fund my Zeiss 100. While I love the Zeiss I needed to get back to 1:1 and better working distance and so just picked up the Nikon 200/4. My impression after about 3 outings with the Nikon is, "Why the heck didn't I buy this a long time ago?!?!?". Bloody great lens. Not sure it is any sharper than my old Sigma 150, but is at least as sharp. It has more character, in a good way. The isolation is astounding, the focus control is fantastic and feel is just so damn cool. If you can find one at a good price, I'd go for the Nikon.

Peace,

Todd



Jul 26, 2016 at 04:05 PM
birdied
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


runamuck wrote:
The Sigma has been the darling of many here on Fred Miranda. The $700 price difference between Nikon/Sigma is nothing to sneeze at either.
I have the Tamron 180 that cost $739 because the Sigma was sold out everywhere and cost more. I have been happy with it for my (very) occasional forays into macro.


Thanks so much . So many choices , hard to choose.

---------------------------------------------

Todd Warnke wrote:
Used the non-OS Sigma 150 for several years and sold about 4-5 years back to fund my Zeiss 100. While I love the Zeiss I needed to get back to 1:1 and better working distance and so just picked up the Nikon 200/4. My impression after about 3 outings with the Nikon is, "Why the heck didn't I buy this a long time ago?!?!?". Bloody great lens. Not sure it is any sharper than my old Sigma 150, but is at least as sharp. It has more character, in a good way. The isolation is astounding, the focus control
...Show more

Oh Todd, you may have just pushed me more toward the 200 . I am now looking for used ones

Birdie



Jul 26, 2016 at 07:08 PM
morris
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


Hi Roberta,

Any of the Nikon 180mm f2.8 versions with a tube you already own produce stunning macros and work equally well as a long portrait lens. There reasonably light well balanced with the only downside that they use the body focus motor. I absolutely love mine. Most of the butterfly photos you have seen me post are taken with this lens.

Morris



Jul 26, 2016 at 08:00 PM
LMT1972
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I believe they recently "discontinued" the 200 f4. This may mean a new version is on the horizon. Not sure what this also means regarding service and parts for this lens should something go wrong (it is built like a tank though!)? Resale value also probably better on the Nikkor at this stage. Working distance also slightly longer on the Nikon (26cm vs 20cm from front element). However the Sigma is said to be sharper and also takes their 1.4 TC very well (you can use the TC to increase working distance at 1:1 magnification).

The 200 f4 is legendary and I don't think you can go wrong with either choice.

Cheers
Leigh



Jul 26, 2016 at 11:04 PM
LeifG
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I own the 200mm micro and it is an amazing lens, very sharp close up and at distance, excellent contrast. However, it has been discontinued and some parts are no longer available, hence I was not able to get mine repaired (it has a delaminated element group). But, you might be able to get a new one at a bargain price once the new one is announced. I hear the Sigma is nice too, although I suspect it is not as robust, but probably fine if you do not abuse it.


Jul 27, 2016 at 04:25 AM
birdied
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


morris wrote:
Hi Roberta,

Any of the Nikon 180mm f2.8 versions with a tube you already own produce stunning macros and work equally well as a long portrait lens. There reasonably light well balanced with the only downside that they use the body focus motor. I absolutely love mine. Most of the butterfly photos you have seen me post are taken with this lens.

Morris


Thanks Morris. I have thought about the 180 . My concern is getting to 1:1. Not sure how many tubes and how much reduced light.

---------------------------------------------

LMT1972 wrote:
I believe they recently "discontinued" the 200 f4. This may mean a new version is on the horizon. Not sure what this also means regarding service and parts for this lens should something go wrong (it is built like a tank though!)? Resale value also probably better on the Nikkor at this stage. Working distance also slightly longer on the Nikon (26cm vs 20cm from front element). However the Sigma is said to be sharper and also takes their 1.4 TC very well (you can use the TC to increase working distance at 1:1 magnification).

The 200 f4 is legendary and
...Show more

Thanks for the information on the 200. Being discontinued definitely makes me rethink it especially used.

---------------------------------------------

LeifG wrote:
I own the 200mm micro and it is an amazing lens, very sharp close up and at distance, excellent contrast. However, it has been discontinued and some parts are no longer available, hence I was not able to get mine repaired (it has a delaminated element group). But, you might be able to get a new one at a bargain price once the new one is announced. I hear the Sigma is nice too, although I suspect it is not as robust, but probably fine if you do not abuse it.



Leif, thanks so much. At this point I think I will just wait and see if they update the 200, buying it used at this point does not seem like the wise thing to do.

Birdie



Jul 27, 2016 at 08:44 AM
SoundHound
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I bought a mint used copy of the "D" version. I love the lens. I was skeptical of the AF for macro but it has value. This lens really has a BIG reputation. Cool crackle finish and mechanicals of the AIS age. I can use it on my D810 or D3300 for even closer magnification and more distant working length.
Super sharp and a moderate size/weight compared to the 70-200 F2.8. I adapted a 77mm fixed lens hood and filter to the 67mm front threads and added an Arca Swiss lens plate.

If Nikon makes a new version it will be all plastic and the price will double. I would imagine once a new Micro is announced these will jump up in, used, value. Nikon can't make a better lens and VR is really unnecessary.



Jul 27, 2016 at 08:48 AM
CanadaMark
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


What about the Sigma 180 OS MACRO? That's probably the longest, modern, macro you're going to find.


Jul 27, 2016 at 10:26 AM
RP3lks
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


Both are great optics. If I could have either, I'd take the Sigma 150 f2.8 OS because of how much brighter it will be in the viewfinder. I find it much easier to see with an f2.8 lens for the close-up subjects.

With the speculation about the 200 f4 micro being discontinued or replaced, I'm waiting to see if Nikon makes a newer micro Nikkor that is either an f2.8 or f3.5 at 180mm focal length.



Jul 27, 2016 at 01:45 PM
rw11
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


the Sigma 150 is very nice; same for their 180 - but HEAVY

I'd wait (well, in fact I AM waiting) to see if there will be a new 200 Micro from Mr. Nik Ahn in Sept.

BUT, you may want to also consider a m43 setup - Panasonic gives you many, many stops with IS in both body AND lens; then there is the sterling Oly macro with a recent writeup by Ming Thein

IS or VR is very helpful away from 1:1 and many macro pics are really closeups at 1/2 to 1/3 or so

you get a much more portable setup too, not to mention DOF... it would likely cost about the same as a new nikon 200 too - a friend is about to convince me to follow him into the satanic land of m43 - at least for in the field micro work

Let us know what you do and how you like it!



Jul 27, 2016 at 03:27 PM
birdied
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


SoundHound wrote:
I bought a mint used copy of the "D" version. I love the lens. I was skeptical of the AF for macro but it has value. This lens really has a BIG reputation. Cool crackle finish and mechanicals of the AIS age. I can use it on my D810 or D3300 for even closer magnification and more distant working length.
Super sharp and a moderate size/weight compared to the 70-200 F2.8. I adapted a 77mm fixed lens hood and filter to the 67mm front threads and added an Arca Swiss lens plate.

If Nikon makes a new version it will
...Show more

I have read so many wonderful things about the 200 f/4. Buying something that is still a pretty nice chunk of change that may not be able to be fixed does concern me. Still thinking about , as I am intrigued with this lens.

---------------------------------------------

CanadaMark wrote:
What about the Sigma 180 OS MACRO? That's probably the longest, modern, macro you're going to find.


Mark, I have considered it, but the weight is what concerns me. I handhold most of my shots and this one exceeds my limits of what I can hold steady .

---------------------------------------------

rw11 wrote:
the Sigma 150 is very nice; same for their 180 - but HEAVY

I'd wait (well, in fact I AM waiting) to see if there will be a new 200 Micro from Mr. Nik Ahn in Sept.

BUT, you may want to also consider a m43 setup - Panasonic gives you many, many stops with IS in both body AND lens; then there is the sterling Oly macro with a recent writeup by Ming Thein

IS or VR is very helpful away from 1:1 and many macro pics are really closeups at 1/2 to 1/3 or so

you get a much more portable setup
...Show more

Agree that the weight of the 180 is what makes it unattractive to me.

I know nothing about the m43 world, so never really considered it. However, it may be something to consider .





Jul 27, 2016 at 08:24 PM
rw11
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


Birdie, As I understand it m43 gives you:

1. much greater portability in the field
2. better depth of field
3. Panasonic has IS/VR in BOTH the body and the lens, so their Panasonic-leica macro on their body can give 6 or
7 stops as long as you doing a close-up (and not 1:1 or close, where the IS effect decreases)
4. resolution good for 16" to 20" prints

The above is what I'm told by a friend who is tired of carrying around his D800 to photo frogs & snakes (he is a scientist who studies those groups and an extremely avid photographer). My plan is to let him gain more experience with the system before I buy into it. Neither he nor I would think of using m43 for landscapes while working out of a car...



Jul 28, 2016 at 02:27 PM
Cheryle Sytsma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I have the Tamron 180 macro and really like it.
Have had two of the Nikko 200 micros and never could
like them very well.

Sigma 150 f/2.8 41.6 oz

Tamron 180 f/3.5 32.45 oz

Nikon 200 micro f/4 41.6 oz



Aug 01, 2016 at 07:39 PM
birdied
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


rw11 wrote:
Birdie, As I understand it m43 gives you:

1. much greater portability in the field
2. better depth of field
3. Panasonic has IS/VR in BOTH the body and the lens, so their Panasonic-leica macro on their body can give 6 or
7 stops as long as you doing a close-up (and not 1:1 or close, where the IS effect decreases)
4. resolution good for 16" to 20" prints

The above is what I'm told by a friend who is tired of carrying around his D800 to photo frogs & snakes (he is a scientist who studies those groups and an extremely avid photographer).
...Show more


Keep us posted on the progress.
---------------------------------------------

Cheryle Sytsma wrote:
I have the Tamron 180 macro and really like it.
Have had two of the Nikko 200 micros and never could
like them very well.

Sigma 150 f/2.8 41.6 oz

Tamron 180 f/3.5 32.45 oz

Nikon 200 micro f/4 41.6 oz


Thanks so much Cheryle. Might just have to rent a couple and see how I do.

Birdie



Aug 01, 2016 at 09:10 PM
K6AZ
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I'm sure glad I do most of my macro work on a copy stand and don't have to worry about viewfinder brightness or VR/OS. I was having difficulty with the 105mm micro having to get so close to the subject it was difficult to light. Found a non-OS micro here on FM for $350 and couldn't be happier, as sharp as all my other macros.


Aug 01, 2016 at 10:32 PM
LeifG
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


FWIW I could not see myself using the Nikon 200mm F4 AFD micro hand held. I always use mine on a tripod. It's not just the weight and size, but the narrow field of view.

BTW I don't think you mentioned the intended use. For semi-close ups the 300mm F4 AFS lens works, although not as sharp as the micro lenses. Again, you'll really need a tripod.



Aug 02, 2016 at 01:33 AM
barisaxer
Offline
• • •
[X]
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I had both and sold the 200 nikon. I found the sigma 150 to be a great lens for me. I have the older sigma. Great lens for the money.


Aug 02, 2016 at 10:13 AM
K6AZ
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Sigma 150 or Nikon 200 Macro ?


I should have said Sigma 180mm macro in my last post. I love the older Sigma macros as well, also have the 50mm and 70mm.


Aug 02, 2016 at 12:39 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.