Has anyone owned the new Sigma 180/2.8 macro? How is it? I am planning to purchase the EF180/3.5L, but the Sigma draw my attention. Sigma has very good reputation on their macro lenses, and the new 180/2.8 macro is their flagship. It has IS and half stop faster than Canon. They are both in the same price range, though.

I'd take a leap on the Sigma. If it stinks, return it. I've owned the Sigma 105 and the 150, and both were stellar. The 150 was one of the best lenses I've ever owned. Truly awesome. If the 180 is anything like that, it'll be a gem of a lens. I have no reason to think it wouldn't be.

I owned the Sigma 180 F3.5 macro in Nikon mount and the Sigma F1.4 converter. They were a great pair. I would believe the OS version would be also. When the lens focus moves slightly from inf. the aperture moved down to about 3.8 or 4.3. I would guess most others would do also. I also owned the Sigma 50, 70 and 150 macr o lenses and thought them all outstanding. The 70MM maybe being the prize of the lot.
Good Luck
Harry Palmer

Thanks for the feedback. How is the LCA performance of these Sigma 150/2.8 & 180/3.5 macro? (especially, wide open) BTW, I am going to shoot some chromium metal and jewelry. I wish the new 180/2.8 would have minimum LCA.

Lenstip gives it a very good rating and the resolution numbers are superb.


http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=355

phuang3 wrote:
Thanks for the feedback. How is the LCA performance of these Sigma 150/2.8 & 180/3.5 macro? (especially, wide open) BTW, I am going to shoot some chromium metal and jewelry. I wish the new 180/2.8 would have minimum LCA.

If I'm remembering correctly, the Sigma 150 was essentially apochromatic. Really wonderful performance.

Bruce Sawle wrote:
Lenstip gives it a very good rating and the resolution numbers are superb.


http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=355


This review is very helpful. Thank you.

The Canon 180 macro is a phenomenal lens. Make sure that Sigma is really really good before you change your mind.

user222 wrote:
The Canon 180 macro is a phenomenal lens. Make sure that Sigma is really really good before you change your mind.


After viewing many photos, it looks like the new Sigma is better in IQ than 180L, but some reported that Sigma is not as solid as Canon. Many Sigma users complained about AF issues on their lenses. Other thoughts including retain value and weight... My only experience with Sigma is their 12-24. No problem so far. This is a hard choice.

There is another thread here about issues for Sigma 150 OS. I have no doubt on the IQ of the new Sigma. I do have concerns about their AF and OS quality. The OS motor is new and not proven.

A month since last activity here. Anybody have a month's worth of shooting experience to add to what's already here?

I'm looking for a long macro mostly to shoot "bugs." I used Sigma 150/2.8 and Tamron 180/3.5 on Nikon. Both were good. The lack of autofocus-with-manual-override on the Tamron was annoying.

Sold my Canon 180 macro and my Sigma 180 macro and my Sigma 150 macro. Now I am happy (another way of saying yes to true APO) with my Sigma 150 OS macro.

Leica 180/2.8 APO with tube! That's my GAS!

wayne seltzer wrote:
Leica 180/2.8 APO with tube! That's my GAS!

I started the thread, but I'm currently combing 100 APO with 2X APO extender to achieve 200mm perspective view. I shoot still life more than insects, so I can live with that (slower speed + tripod all the time). Still waiting for the price cut on Sigma 180 OS.

Been using 180 Tamron. The 2.8 looks attractive. I used 90 Tamron+ Viv 2x before that. Really like 180+tc for bugs. 100+tc handheld is hard but possible.

Sigma 180/2.8 OS is 1640g and that's very heavy. Canon 180/3.5 is much lighter at 1100g and the Tamron 180/3.5 is the lightest at 920g. All have excellent IQ (like all macro lenses) and one has to decide based on other merits.

Will it be used only for insect photography? If not, for what else?
Will it be used mostly on tripod?
Why is stabilization important to you?
Why do you need the extra half stop? Surely not for macro shots.
Will the extra weight of the 180/2.8 OS bother you?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

My backpack must weigh over 15 kg full of camera equipment and supplies. I don't know if I'd notice an extra 500g. On the other hand, I don't know if I'd notice an extra half a stop at that focal length.

All these lenses can be expected to produce good results, but the pre-OS Sigma 150/2.8 is outstanding in the company it keeps. There may be differences in image quality among the current set of lenses too.

The IS in the latest 100mm macro is supposed to cancel lateral vibrations, improving quality near close focus. Do any of the long lenses have similar reduction? I don't know what's inside Sigma's "OS".

Bruce Sawle wrote:
Lenstip gives it a very good rating and the resolution numbers are superb.


http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=355
Thank you Bruce for the link to "Lenstip"
I read with much satisfaction the reviews and test of my 150-500mm Sigma.
Regards
jim

I quite enjoyed the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 when I reviewed it. I didn't do anything scientific, just tested it in use from a non-macro shooter's perspective. I was really impressed with the sharpness out of the camera without adjustments and the focusing accuracy left little to be desired.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012/11/22/review-sigma-apo-macro-180mm-f2-8-ex-dg-os-hsm/

I use the Tamron 180 - its plenty sharp but needs a tripod. OS should be nice! Dave