 |
|
|
deanie08
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 2, 2017
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 5, 2017
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Good quality features.
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive
|
|
This is a very amazing lens and surely you would love using it over and over again. One of my favorite.
http://www.erinmartinphotography.com/newborn
|
|
 Nov 5, 2017
|
|
haringo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Mar 17, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
wow - sharpness! price!!! image quality, bookeh
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF - however I always focus manually. This is a macro lens!
|
|
This is my favorite lens! It is sharp and I love the working distance for macro work. Please note that this lens is for macro work though!
Color and contrast are awesome and you can get close to you subject easily.
I have owned the Canon 100mm USM and the Sigma 100mm. This is much better than the other ones. A Canon or Nikon macro lens would cost you twice without delivering superior results! You won't regret it! You will find more photos here taken with this lens: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Haring-Photography/154205936576
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2013
|
|
wedding-
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 17, 2011
Location: Finland
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Jun 17, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $800.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, OS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not very cheap.
|
|
I have the OS version of this lens, and it is pretty amazing! It does everything you'd expect it to do, and on the other hand doesn't have any big flaws. It's a 150mm lens, so it's not so multi-use-lens as an 50mm, 70mm or an 105mm macro lens would be.
The close-ups in this post are mostly taken with this lens: http://jannemiettinen.fi/wedding-blog/blog/a-winter-wedding-in-helsinki-riina-juha/
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2012
|
|
mrcolin2u
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1876
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, well built lens. Price.
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS. Focusing as to be expected is slow.
|
|
I've had this lens for a couple of years, I bought it slightly used although it looked brand new. The lens is extremely sharp and I've had some good results as a macro and a telephoto. It is definitely a keeper.
Here are some pictures I took last year on July 4th of the fireworks display. I was about 1 -2 miles away I'm guessing.
I had the Canon 1D M4 on a tripod and using a piece of card as a shutter for multiple exposures with MLU.
http://mrcolin2u.zenfolio.com/p578312575
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2012
|
|
Jason C
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 10, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 35
|
|
Review Date: Dec 8, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp in Macro territory/good colors and contrast/cost
|
|
Cons:
|
Only 'okay' for medium telephoto work
|
|
|
Lens used with Canon 1Ds and 1DMKII.
I purchased this lens used to double as not only a 1:1 macro, but also for medium telephoto work.
First off, Auto focusing. It's slow, a little slower than expected, but not a shock, nor is AF needed for all my macro work or most of my telephoto work.
For macro, this lens truly shines. Sharpness, detail, color and contrast are just great...from wide open and on. I've not stopped down further than f/16 with the Sigma, and the macro images are still wonderful.
For medium telephoto, this lens lacks in key areas. Compared to my 70-200/4 L in controlled conditions and at similar settings, the Sigma demonstrates far less sharpness, detail, color and contrast than the Canon zoom. Of course, my Canon zoom is slower than Sigma by a stop, however the Sigma prime takes a back seat to the Canon zoom in the medium telephoto department.
Apples and oranges; yes. However, Sigma's 'orange' is trying to also taste like Canon's 'apple' but does not succeed. Still, I do find the medium telephoto images from the Sigma still usable, and it does fine wide open. f/5.6 is when the Sigma starts getting good for non macro images.
Great 1:1 mag macro lens, just phenomenal.
Average medium telephoto lens, but usable.
Jason C
|
|
|
Dec 8, 2010
|
|
hackmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 19, 2010
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 19, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image Quality, sharpness, color, contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
no OS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2010
|
|
LPrimeFreak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 29, 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $450.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, f2.8, exellent distance for shy insects, also for portraits, built like a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
Slow AF
|
|
|
Had this lens on my 40D in past, it focuses slow, but macro is mostly manualy focussing.
I tested it for portraits also, very sharp. Working distance is better than 100mm if you want to take pictures of butterfly's or other shy insects.
I sold it cause we actually have no insects here in the city and I have no time for nature walks, behalf of that mosquito i portraited on our window :-D
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2010
|
|
fr0z
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 18, 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 66
|
|
Review Date: May 24, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, size, big aperture, AF motor inside the lens, three position AF limiter, price.
|
|
Cons:
|
No vibration reduction
|
|
When I changed my camera gear from Canon to Nikon in 2007, I started thinking what combination or lens should I use to photograph little bugs and insects. During my Canon times, I had used Canon's 70-200 image stabilized zoom lens with extension tubes, but this time I decided to spend my euros to the real macro lens!
Nikon's 105mm f2.8G AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor was the first that got my attention. But would 105mm be enough with FF-camera when subjects are really small or shy? So I decided to take a look at the longer macro lenses that would give me more working distance.
I looked different alternatives, and the final pair was Nikon's 200mm f4D ED-IF AF Micro-Nikkor and Sigma's 150mm f2.8 EX APO MACRO DG HSM. After hard thinking, my decision was the Bugzilla.
Things that mattered were these: smaller size, bigger aperture, autofocus motor inside the lens and of course the big difference in price.
I have been really really really satisfied to that Sigma EX 150mm f2.8 macro lens! I haven't thought a single time that I replace it with something else. That kind of lens that would replace that Bugzilla in my camerabag does not exist at this time.
I have wroted a five page review of this Sigma 150/2.8 macro lens to my homepage. It includes also sample pictures with 100% crops.
You can find it here -> http://www.janneheimonen.net/Articles/Sigma-150mm-f28-EX-APO-MACRO-DG-HSM-review/
Here is the finnish language version of the article -> http://www.janneheimonen.net/Artikkelit/Sigma-150mm-f28-EX-APO-MACRO-DG-HSM-arvostelu/
|
|
|
May 24, 2010
|
|
phreeky82
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 22, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 13, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Working distance, build quality, autofocus, large aperture, image quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Finish
|
|
|
I chose the 150mm for the working distance, yet still retaining a large aperture. Not extending while focusing also sounded like a good idea. I was also keen on a lens with a tripod collar for mounting extra flashes and lights for macro shots.
The lens hasn't disappointed - tack sharp wide open, very fast autofocus (although it can seem slow if you let it search from near to far as it has a long way to go due to the short MFD), takes teleconverters well, is well built and comes with a good quality tripod collar and lens hood.
My only complaint is a general Sigma one, and that's the finish. The finish they use marks easily, and many people report the paint peeling after excessive use on Sigma lenses.
|
|
|
May 13, 2010
|
|
JRKO
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super sharp - great for portraits
|
|
Cons:
|
Slight hunting issue but its a macro lens so this is bound to happen
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2010
|
|
mmari
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Dec 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, sharp, & sharp! did i say sharp?... build quality, price
|
|
Cons:
|
slow AF compared to canons. AF hunts more, must use limiter if using macro or non-macro shots. coating. the badge, my only non-canon lens.
|
|
|
i sold my EF 100 macro right away when i saw this lens at BnS. no regrets!
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2009
|
|
Guidenet
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 23, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 95
|
|
Review Date: Oct 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $559.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Optical and build quality at least equal to the best of the big boy, probably better. Excellent tripod collar.
|
|
Cons:
|
It hunts a bit, even with the focus limiter.
|
|
|
I purchased this lens for my Nikon D300 based on Photozone and other review sites and after asking various forum members who owned this lens. Many said it was one of the few lenses that could compete with Nikon and Canon. They were right. This lens is superb optically. Now with my D700, the lens still performs admirably.
It's all metal and well made. I can easily hang several macro flash units from the nose without issue. The tripod mount is heavy duty and locks down without vibration.
It also makes a great short fast telephoto. There is no other macro lens over 105mm with a max aperture of f/2.8. This lens is a bit heavy and large, but well worth it and affectionately called the Bugma among its users. It's fast becoming a well deserved cult favorite. The only issue is that because of its increased popularity, it has become quite a bit more expensive in the marketplace.
If price is not an object, and if you want the very best macro lens or short fast telephoto, this lens ought to be on your short list.
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2009
|
|
locomacdaddy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 114
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
razor sharp, fast focus, well built
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
This lens is a gem! Run...don't walk to get this Macro. More working distance than a 100mm and nice and compact vs. a 200mm macro.
I use this lens for macro and portraits. Even wide open it is the sharpest lens I own (having all the top Nikon zooms). Contemplated the Zeiss 100 but this lens gives you 1:1, sharp portraits and autofocus...oh yeah, all for about half the cost!
Being my first aftermarket lens...I was of the opinion that brand lenses are, overall, better. I may have to rethink my attitudes. This lens is perfect.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2009
|
|
maddog76
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 23, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent performance. No distortion or CA. Image quality is pin sharp. AF is fast and quiet (for those who use AF on macro).
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
This lens is outstanding. The image quality is nothing short of breath taking. No signs of any distortion or CA, crystal clear pin sharp images every shot.
The 3 position focus limit switch, works a treat and proves more than useful in AF (although I use it in Manual 99% of the time)
Works well with 1.4x teleconveter, although minimum focus distance is increased to .52m, then thats not a problem at 210mm.
The Bokeh is very pleasing indeed, especially so at f/2.8
I cannot praise this lens enough, if you are thinking of a macro lens, do not settle for anything else, this IS the best.
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009
|
|
WhiteDog
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Jul 20, 2009
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 20, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, no distortion or CA
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
Bought this for my Nikon D700, because I wanted a good macro lens. The 105mm reach on the Nikkor wasn't enough (only on my D200), so I took a chance and got a Sigma. Normally I only buy Nikon glas, but this Sigma surprised me a lot. Very good build quality and perfect optical quality. This is "up with the pros" aka perfect in all matters.
The f/2.8 also comes in handy when using it for other purposes than macro, so this baby is my new "use it all the time" lens 
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2009
|
|
graemeak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 30, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 313
|
|
Review Date: May 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build quality, fast aperture, great working distance, price, comes with hood, tripod collar (and Sigma make very good tripod collars, seems identical to my 70-200mm one except they swapped felt for a more shiny plastic), nice size and weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Erm... trying to think... the AF? But who cares! When you use the focus limiter the focus is good for portraits etc. when you're doing macro you don't need AF
|
|
|
Just an excellent all around lens. Very sharp, very impressive - my 3rd Sigma lens and I intend to stick with Sigma! You save hundreds of £££'s and get 95% of what you get with Canon (sometimes more).
Stop considering which macro lens and just get this beast!
|
|
|
May 3, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
103
|
299358
|
Nov 5, 2017
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
98% of reviewers
|
$548.89
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.60
|
9.54
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
