JohnK007 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I have studied Canon macros (and owned most of them) for a number of years. I moved from the Canon 180mm f/3.5 to the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO Macro. It blew the Canon away. After switching to Nikon a year ago, I did the same thing with their macros. The Sigma was still better than the Nikon AF macros.
However, LenScore never tested the Nikkor 200mm, so the jury is still out there. By every test I have ever seen, the Nikkor 200mm macro is better than the Canon 180 too. If you look at the FAQ of LenScore, they have a Nikkor 200mm f/4.0D IF-ED Micro in the bullpen, ready for testing
So the jury is still out there. Keep in mind, there are 3 similar Sigmas: the Sigma 150 f/2.8, the Sigma 180 f/3.5, and the newer Sigma 180 f/2.8. The last one, the 180 f/2.8 is the best of the bunch. (If you look it up on LenScore, the Sigma 180mm beats ALL AF macro lenses, Canon or Nikon, bar none ... except, again, we're still waiting on the 200 Nikkor.)
I would keep 3 things in mind before you buy:
- Wait for the test to see which prevails, the Sigma 180 f/2.8, or the Nikon 200 f/4;
- Go with the better option overall;
- Realize that "the bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten," so save a few months extra and get the macro lens you *really* want, not just the one you can "afford right now." (You already have a budget, and pretty darned good, macro lens to tide you over while you wait.
While none of your listed choices are 'poor-quality' (they're all good, really), since you're shopping right now, it will feel better to get the very best one you can.
Good luck
|