# Has anyone had negative experiences with the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro?



## crimbfighter (Oct 18, 2010)

Along with other lens replacements, I want a macro lens. I have read many reviews about my options, but keep coming back to the Sigma. I think one of the biggest attractions for me is the reach of the 150mm. So far everything I have read indicated the build quality is excellent, the images rendered are excellent and there aren't really any negatives. The one thing I have found, is more than one person said they just never got comfortable with it, and later opted for the Nikkor 105 VR. 

Has anyone had any negative experiences with this lens? Or positive experiences for that matter?  Also, can any of you chime in on what you think a fair used price is? I'm thinking I won't pay more than 550-600 for a used one. Am I off base on that?


----------



## Garbz (Oct 19, 2010)

A loaded fishing question at best.  Take my advice and look for trends. If you haven't found an internet full of complaints about something then it usually isn't worth complaining about beyond the usual array of the occasional product slipping through quality control. For every happy customer who tells someone about something good, there'll be 10 unhappy customers shouting from the hills they got screwed. Though if you go looking for problems you will find them.


----------



## Overread (Oct 19, 2010)

Well I can't comment on used prices in the US as its not my market area - though you might want to be quicker rather than slower if you want a good used price. Sigma is (at some undefined point) releasing a new 150mm macro with OS so whilst the market might get flooded with more original models there is also the chance that the end of production on the cheaper none-OS version will send the current stock and used stock prices up. 


As for the 150mm specifically the downsides I've found from using it are:

1) It's a bit long for working with a 1.4TC in a butterfly farm/house. In general its also a bit long for indoor macro work some of the time. 

2) You have to use an adaptor ring to fit a raynox DCR 250 to the front of it.

That is about it I think and the first problem is one that only a macro addict is really going to notice in practice whilst the latter is solved with a very cheap stepping ring so is, again, no real problem.
Otherwise its a fantastic lens and one of the easier to light for as well if you use flash - a simple speedlite flash in the hotshoe with a lumiquest softbox (or similar size/design softbox) and you're good to go with some very good lighting. The long working distance means that the flash in this position gives a good overhead light whilst also able to hit the subject all over - even with the hood attached.

And speaking of the hood this is another bonus of a long working distance - having the hood fitted is a major advantage as it will brush twigs, leaves and other problems out of the path of the lens without them hitting the front element. Letting you safely shoot without any need of a "protection" filter in most general situations.

The only thing about it that might be a downside is that its AF, whilst quiet and of the HSM variety (fulltime manual focusing) it is still rather slow, but this is a problem inherent in pretty much all macro lenses so its not as if the sigma is under-performing.


----------



## crimbfighter (Oct 19, 2010)

Garbz said:


> A loaded fishing question at best.  Take my advice and look for trends. If you haven't found an internet full of complaints about something then it usually isn't worth complaining about beyond the usual array of the occasional product slipping through quality control. For every happy customer who tells someone about something good, there'll be 10 unhappy customers shouting from the hills they got screwed. Though if you go looking for problems you will find them.



HA HA, busted...  Wasn't really intended to be loaded, but I could have worded it differently.  I feel like I've researched it pretty well, and seen mostly great reviews, but the one thing I was lacking was testimonials about working with the lens, functionality, ease of use, ect. Just wanted to make sure I wasn't getting into one of those situations where I was only reading reviews made right after purchase, before people had a chance to really work with it and discover any shortfalls over time. 



Overread said:


> Well I can't comment on used prices in the US as its not my market area - though you might want to be quicker rather than slower if you want a good used price. Sigma is (at some undefined point) releasing a new 150mm macro with OS so whilst the market might get flooded with more original models there is also the chance that the end of production on the cheaper none-OS version will send the current stock and used stock prices up.
> 
> 
> As for the 150mm specifically the downsides I've found from using it are:
> ...



Thanks for the feedback, Overread. I didn't even think about the TC issue. I had also heard about the OS version, and part of me wants to wait and see how it performs. But, I'm sure the price will put it out of my budget range. I'm just surprised the prices aren't lower for current used ones. $600 is the cheapest I've found thus far. Maybe I'm expecting too much, though.


----------



## Lenscracker (Oct 25, 2010)

The only negative experience I had was that a flake of dust got inside it, and I had to send it away to have it removed.  The new OS version is supposed to have a weather seal.  I assume that will also help to keep out dust.  I used this lens almost every day for several years,  so I was not really shocked that it sucked in some dust.  I was disappointed, though.   I am looking forward to the OS version.  I can't decide if I should keep this original version, though.  Why sell a really great lens for a paltry sum?


----------



## Overread (Oct 25, 2010)

Most lenses can in time work a little flake of dust into their optics - its a disapointment certainly but a flake of dust shouldn't make any difference to image quality (unlike dust on the camera sensor). 

As for selling for the new version I have a feeling that if the price on the new one is right I'll probably swap over to the new. The old has been a fantastic lens there is no doubt about that, but the additional support of the OS would be very nice to have. I'll have to wait and see how the lens performs in tests though


----------



## Lenscracker (Jan 11, 2011)

When I see dust inside a lens I know that the images it produces are not as good as they can be.  That bothers me.  If I am taking a snapshot of Uncle Ralph eating baked beans at the family reunion, then I agree,  the flake of dust makes no difference.  When I am using a lens to create fine art, like I do with the Sigma 150 mm, I have difficulty accepting less than the very best the lens can do.


----------



## Overread (Jan 11, 2011)

Aye it can be dissapointing, but even weathersealed optics can work a flake of dust or so inside (either during manufacture or through general use. In general though a speck of dust inside a lens will have little to no effect on image quality and I've yet to see anyone demonstrate the negative side to a flake of dust in the lens optical setup.

In digital photography ( esp macro work where you are often using small apertures) dust on the camera sensor (an inevitable part of SLR use unless you weld one lens to the camera body) has far more impact on your end resulting image quality (when using small apertures - f2.8 won't show anything but the worst of dust smears)


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 11, 2011)

Lenscracker said:


> When I see dust inside a lens I know that the images it produces are not as good as they can be.  That bothers me.  If I am taking a snapshot of Uncle Ralph eating baked beans at the family reunion, then I agree,  the flake of dust makes no difference.  When I am using a lens to create fine art, like I do with the Sigma 150 mm, I have difficulty accepting less than the very best the lens can do.



Give me a break, a flake of dust in the air has more of an effect on your photos, so you better start saving up for a vacuum chamber and a space suit.


----------



## barfastic (Jan 12, 2011)

ive had mine for about 1.5 years now. i really like it. i use to ahve the tamron 90mm but on a sony body, i later switched to nikon and opted for a litle bit more reach. i do wish it ahd some sort of stabilisation though.

The only problem ive had with it, is that the focus ring now, makes a tiny squeek near the closest focus range. 

That could have been though due to me taking it to the beach, and generally using it in "rough" conditions.


----------



## richardalois (May 12, 2011)

I am using it on a 5d m2 body and it provides splendid results!


----------



## Derrel (May 12, 2011)

My bad experiences with the Sigma 150/2.8 are legion: every time I see photos taken with the lens, I cry 'cause I do not own the lens!


----------



## Ginu (May 12, 2011)

I've  heard nothing but good things, however there will always be some haters


----------



## aguillory (May 25, 2011)

I love my 150mm Sigma Macro.  The quality  of the images is great.  However, recently, I learned the construction  of the lens to the mounting ring that attaches to the camera is not so  great.  My Sigma lens detached from the mounting ring section and would  have dropped my camera to the ground if I hadn't caught it.  The lens  was mounted on the tripod using the collar so it was safe, except for  the part with the mount that stayed attached to the camera.  The lens is attached by 3  small screws to a plastic ring which is all that was holding up my  camera and battery grip.  The plastic broke and separated from the  screws.  The lens was sent back to Sigma this week and they immediately quoted me $200 to repair.  The lens is just over a year old. I love the lens, but I am not so happy with paying to repair what I consider to be poor construction.


----------



## Overread (May 25, 2011)

If its a product fault sigma warranty is 3 years default so you should be able to get it fixed under that. I have to say though that I've not read of many/any stories of the mount simply breaking under normal use with a camera body attached. This I'd guess that you got a bad copy of the lens or it underwent some kind of drop/pressure before which weakened the mount.


----------



## Derrel (May 25, 2011)

Do a Google search on "Sigma lens coming apart"...or "Sigma lens falling apart", or "Sigma lens breaking in two"...


----------

