Can someone Recommend the Sigma 180 APO Macro EX?

I’m seriously considering the Sigma 180 f/3.5 APO Macro EX and 1.4 TC for use with a Canon 10D. It’s highly recommended for Macro photography but I was interested in how well it does in normal uses other than Macro and also how well it combines with the Sigma 1.4 Tele Converter.

The AF Lens Test Guide rates it higher than the Canon 180 Macro and it's quite a bit cheaper.

toglenn

Well I've got the 105mm Sigma and it produces a hell of a picture. Nice Bokeh. Very well built, too.

My 105mm is a bit of a hunter - it doesn't like to autofocus except in good conditions or better. Which rules out most macro work. I wouldn't want to take this lens hunting quick-moving bugs unless it was a very bright day.

If the slow-AF doesn't bother you then I could recommend it. But that's the 105mm. PhotoZone.com has my 105's AF Speed rated at 1 star (very slow). Both the Sigma and Canon 180 Macros are rated at 2 stars (ok).

Get the tamron.

Nope, in my tests using the Canon, Tamron and Sigma 180's the Sigma performed the worst of the lot. It was soft wide open and improved significantly by f/5.6, however both the Canon and Tamron lenses beat it at all apertures. Get the Tamron, it is good value for money.

BTW Which AF lens test guide is this?

I have been using the Sigma 180mm macro for about six months now. I tried the Canon 180, wayyyyyy too expensive (and I own 3 "L" lenses). Didn't try the Tamron, but the Sigma 180mm Macro is a spectacular lens. Highly recommend it. Price/Performance can't be beat.

Thanks for the comments

Thanks for all your comments. I've decided on the Sigma 180 and ordered it today. It was $140 cheaper than the Tamron.

I try never to use any lens wide open as most lose defination at maxium aperature. I've never used a Sigma lens before now but have read that quality can vary from lens to lens.

The dealer assured me that if I was not satisfied, I could return it. I was concerned about it's performance with the 1.4 TC so I'll post those results after testing.

toglenn

look at this site.... maybe it helps for your decission

http://www.orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100​E.html (text in english)

best regards
Peter

I had the 180mm Sigma Macro for my D100 and it was a great lens. Worth every penny. I would highly recommend it. Now I am a Canon owner so.... I did buy the 105mm Sigma for Canon and I am equally thrilled with it.

Nucki,
That's a very impressive web site. After seeing the results, I cancelled the Sigma order. It clearly was inferior to the Canon and Tamron.

Guess I'll research the Tamron a bit more.

Thanks for the valuable information.

toglenn

no problem! I finally got the 100mm canon. on a 10D it is like a 160mm and thats ok. Its a impressive lens!

best regards
Peter

After doing some checking I found that PhotoZone rated the Tamron 180 Macro @ 5.00. It's the only lens I could find that has that high a rating. All other sites had very favorable comments.

I want the lens for telephoto work as well as Macro work. It will be replacing a 70-200IS which I just sold. That lens was just too bulky and I hardly used it!

So I ordered the Tamron.

toglenn

nucki, thanx for the link!!

I am seriously tempted towards MP-E 65...

Do not believe everything you read.......

I have seen that particular website many times and I too once thought the sigma macros were bad lenses, especially wide open. However, after doing more research I began to believe that something may be wrong with the findings as I kept reading many postivie reviews of the sigma macro lenses.

Well, I bought a Sigma 105mm f2.8 ex macro lens and I am extremely happy with the results. I have tested the lens at f2.8 and I am not sure how (http://www.orchideen-kartierung.de/Macro100​E.html) this site got the results I got as my results were the complete opposite.....producing very sharp images.

Here is a link to my gallery from the Sigma 105mm f2.8 ex macro lens:
http://www.pbase.com/d​ickie/sigma_macro

Here are some specific examples from f2.8:
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/27205657
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/27205660
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/27205647

So I would be cautious of the results of the website mentioned above as their results are not the same of the results I have seen from others.

I too am quite suspicious of those results. There are too many positive comments at photo.net and at Naturescapes.net that contradict them. The Tamron may in fact be better, but check out all of the great photos taken with the Sigma at Naturescapes. There are dozens contributed by a fairly large number of photographers. Now check out the photos taken with a Tamron 180. Oops, there aren't any.

Fred

well, I think no macro lens is really bad! as I found out, macro lenses seems to be relativly easy to produce, thats why I think every lens, sigma or canon, tamron or something else will produce really good results. My decission to go for the canon was, because it was as expensive as the tamron SP 90 AF and if I ever upgrade on a 1DMKII or something else coming, then the lense will work without any possible upgrade.

best regards
Peter