Sigma APO MACRO 180mm f/2.8EX, 1:1 resolving power

[LVF]

Later today (its 6:20 am here in Sequim, Washington) I will finally post my 1:2 photo comparison between the Nikkor 300mm lens + attached 17E II TC lenses to the Sigma APO MACRO 180mm lens.

There was an unexpected result with the Sigma lens which may be very controversial. I expect Robert to chime in on my findings since he has used the Sigma macro lens for many years.

Leon

[Lou Jost]

I look forward to seeing the results.

[RobertOToole]

Later today (its 6:20 am here in Sequim, Washington) I will finally post my 1:2 photo comparison between the Nikkor 300mm lens + attached 17E II TC lenses to the Sigma APO MACRO 180mm lens.

There was an unexpected result with the Sigma lens which may be very controversial. I expect Robert to chime in on my findings since he has used the Sigma macro lens for many years.

Leon

Hi Leon,

Just got back in town, did you have a chance to post the findings? I didnt see any? Did I miss something?

Looking forward to seeing the test results.

Robert

[rjlittlefield]

Just got back in town, did you have a chance to post the findings? I didnt see any? Did I miss something?

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=34994 , perhaps?

--Rik

[JohnKoerner]

A couple of years ago, I wrote a very long article explaining why the Sigma 180 Apo Macro was the best 'single' field macro lens for a nature photographer. (Compared to the Canon 180 and Nikkor 200.)

It is a great lens, has AF, a tripod collar, very good resolution (for its class) and provided a lot of solutions within its price point.

That said, I upgraded to the Voigtländer SL 125mm f/2.5 APO-Lanthar Macro for close-up work (better in every way for critical macro work) ... while simultaneously upgrading to the Nikkor 300 VR II for longer-range, quick 'nail the shot now' work.

As I posted in LVF's other thread, to compare the lower-level Nikkor 300 f/4 to the Sigma 180 at 1:2 (handicapping the Nikon with a 1.7 TC) is as unfair as comparing the Sigma 180 (handicapped with a 1.7) with to the Nikkor at 300mm. Both lenses will fail to beat each other at their own game.

That said, the vastly-superior Nikkor 300mm f/2.8 VR II will beat the Sigma with an extender, at 1:2, and blow it out of the water at 300mm, without one. And I have owned both.

The Sigma is a great tool overall, but (except for AF when you need it) it cannot match the Voigtländer at critical 1:2, or 1:1, shots either. And it sure isn't going to match the standard for excellence at 300mm

[RobertOToole]

Just got back in town, did you have a chance to post the findings? I didnt see any? Did I miss something?

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/v ... hp?t=34994 , perhaps?

--Rik

Thats it, thanks Rik!