Sigma 150mm or Canon 70-200 f/4?

[AC/DC]

Hi everyone,

I've got some money saved up, and would like a new lens. At the moment, I've got the sigma 17-70mm, which is a great little wide angle/standard jobbie, and the canon 400mm f/5.6L. I kinda need something to fill the gap, but at the same time, I really would like a macro lens!

The lens I was thinking could fill the gap is the 70-200 f/4, which I've heard is an excellent lens. The macro lens I've been looking at is the Sigma 150mm - again, I've heard that it's very good.

But this got me thinking - can the sigma 150mm - albeit not as well as the 70-200 - fill the gap between my current lenses? I.e can it be used for compressed landscapes, a bit of sports?

There's one more thing furthering the problem. I'm hoping to go to Skomer soon, and understand that a lot of the birds will be very close. Too close for the 400 - which I should still be able to use for more distant birds and flight shots. Would a macro lens do O.K for these closer birds? Or would the 70-200 be a lot better?

Thanks very much if you can help!
Steve.

[GYRob]

i think the 70/200 is the best bet its super sharp and takes a 1.4tc very well and if you can get some ex tubes too then close up ( not macro ) would also be posible they would also fit all your lenses.
Rob.

[Nikon Kid]

I have the Sigma 150 and its a brilliant lens I took it to the Farnes a couple of weeks ago and it will take 1.4 TC well.
I did take some birds with it close up but the AF is very slow against the 400mm f5.6
so only sitting birds for me with it, you can always stick a spacer in the 400mm f5.6
I think in retrospect I could have used it more, but its like a boy in a sweet shop with all the birds,
you do need to be grounded and methodical, thats if Skomer is much the same as the Farnes

[Roy C]

I agree with Rob, your best bet would be the 70-200/4. I would not have thought that the Macro would be all that good for landscapes or sport although they are useful for portraits. I tried a few landscapes with my Canon macro and it was not very good at all and as for sports/birds, the AF would be too slow to be of much use. A Macro lens is a specialised job where as the 70/200 is more of a 'jack of all trades'

The 70-200/4 could do both landscapes and sports/birds . Also the 70-200/4 is a very good lens for Butterflies/Dragons, especially if used with a extension tube and/or a 1.4 tc (I prefer it to the macro as it gives you a greater working distance). The 70-200/4 is a superb all round lens IMO.

[Vectis Birder]

Another vote for the 70-200/f4, the fact it's a zoom will give you more flexibility.

[David Smith]

I have the Sigma 150 and-while its a cracking macro-I think the 70-200 would be far better for your requirements.
As someone stated the AF on the 150mm is quite slow compared to others and I really only use it for macro because of that.

[Nikon Kid]

Hi everyone,

I kinda need something to fill the gap, but at the same time, I really would like a macro lens!

Steve.

If you want a macro 150 Sigma £538 if you want something to fill the gap 70-200/4 £523 non IS, so much the same price. I would not bring your trip to Skomer into the equation its just one trip.

EDIT BTW these were taken with the Sigma 150

[Roy C]

EDIT BTW these were taken with the Sigma 150
Sorry Terry but it kind of shows that these were taken with a macro lens, I would not use a macro for birds myself unless I could get within a few feet. A macro lens is optimised for close focusing and anything approaching infinity is bound to suffer.
Here are a few birds taken with the 70-200/4 + 1.4tc a few months ago for comparison.

[Nikon Kid]

I agree Roy with your statement, Macro is for taking Macros, but just wanted to show it could take OK Birds.
AC/DC has to make his mind up which way to full, does he really want a macro lens or a gap filler.
So with that in mind heres some macro shots and remember I am still learning.

[Roy C]

I agree Roy with your statement, Macro is for taking Macros, but just wanted to show it could take OK Birds.
AC/DC has to make his mind up which way to full, does he really want a macro lens or a gap filler.
So with that in mind heres some macro shots and remember I am still learning.
They are very good Terry but the OP was asking for a lens to do compressed Landscapes and Sports specifically and IMO there is no comparison between the 70-200 or a macro lens for these purposes, the zoom wins hands down. Now if he specifically wanted a lens for macro work that would be different.

[Nikon Kid]

OK Roy got me knickers in a twist again :-C I should read right through the post, but he might say now he wants a macro :-O

[AC/DC]

Thanks very much for all the different views. The 70-200 does seem like the way to go. I kinda knew it was the most logical choice - it's just my urge for a macro lens got me wondering if they could be versatile.

[JohnZ]

I doubt that very much Terry.

[Vectis Birder]

Thanks very much for all the different views. The 70-200 does seem like the way to go. I kinda knew it was the most logical choice - it's just my urge for a macro lens got me wondering if they could be versatile.

Maybe the 70-200/4 plus extension tubes might fit the bill, until you can afford to add the macro at a later date?

[Roy C]

Maybe the 70-200/4 plus extension tubes might fit the bill, until you can afford to add the macro at a later date?
Certainly worth thinking about, I find the 70-200 with tubes and maybe a tc actually better than a macro for the likes of Dragons and butterflies.

[AC/DC]

Just to update: I bought a macro lens!

Why? Well, to be honest, I don't take that many landscape or sports shots, and was just wondering how useful a 70-200 might be, to convince myself that I didn't just want it for Skomer. The only reason I thought about it was because of Skomer, and as Terry mentions, it's not worth 1 trip. On the other hand, I have wanted a macro lens for a long time - I was just trying to see if it could sorta fill the boots of the 70-200 at the same time. Having recieved the sigma 150mm, I'm definitely happy I've made the right choice - it's a fantastic lens and I'm having great fun with it.

[Vectis Birder]

Nice one Steve. A Sigma 150mm is a good macro, from what I have heard. I want a macro when I can afford one and the Sigma is one I'd like. Great pics, by the way, especially the fly.

[Jaff]

Good choice. A macro lens can open a whole other world of photography to fill your time and has a lot more scope for creativity and imagination in the images.

[Highcountry]

The cool thing about a macro lens is that you can have a blast using it around the homestead. Your flower beds and gardens are full of macro opportunities.

Have fun!

[Nikon Kid]

Just to update: I bought a macro lens!

Why? Well, to be honest, I don't take that many landscape or sports shots, and was just wondering how useful a 70-200 might be, to convince myself that I didn't just want it for Skomer. The only reason I thought about it was because of Skomer, and as Terry mentions, it's not worth 1 trip. On the other hand, I have wanted a macro lens for a long time - I was just trying to see if it could sorta fill the boots of the 70-200 at the same time. Having recieved the sigma 150mm, I'm definitely happy I've made the right choice - it's a fantastic lens and I'm having great fun with it.


I was right in the end, welcome to the world of the little ones.
Thats made me think get out with my 150mm Sigma it needs a trip out, but today looks overcast and rain...........

[Roy C]

I was right in the end,
The OP asks for a lens for "compressed landscapes, a bit of sports" and to this end Terry you were most definitely wrong by advocating that a Macro lens would be best suited to this ;););)

p.s. I look forward to seeing your landscapes and action shots from the Macro lens :t:

[Roy C]

Best of luck with the Macro lens Steve. Like as already been mentioned, macro photography opens up a whole new world of photo opportunities.
Mind you I personally find true macro very difficult (much, much more difficult than birds and they are difficult enough).How the heck these guys manage to do this focus stacking pics I do not know, I have a job to get one decent shot of a live creature let alone 7 or 8 with different focus points (I often suspect that the subjects are dead !). I am sure you will find macro a good challenge.

[Nikon Kid]

The OP asks for a lens for "compressed landscapes, a bit of sports" and to this end Terry you were most definitely wrong by advocating that a Macro lens would be best suited to this ;););)

p.s. I look forward to seeing your landscapes and action shots from the Macro lens :t:

I know what you are saying Roy, but I could read in his post that he really wanted a 150 sigma macro lens. I am very sorry for Crowing and any puns. o:)

Don't take it too serous Roy, its just a hobby

In the future I do want a nice Landscape lens, but again there's so many to choose from and they are expensive

[Roy C]

Don't take it too serous Roy, its just a hobby

You are quite right Terry, I have been on this 'craze' for over three years now which is a long time for me (my fads usually last about a year before I move on :-O ). I am starting to take it much to seriously which is worrying - thinking of just getting a G10 or the like for occasional snapping and maybe having a crack at something new (been looking at Canon Pro video cameras 8-P ).

[AC/DC]

Thanks for the kind words. I agree with you Roy, it definately is tricky - the slightest movement puts the focus out and ruins the picture! I like a challenge though!

When I originally posted this thread I was in a particular mindset, and wanted to be convinced that the 70-200 was the best choice by being told how useful it was - but as Terry correctly guessed, I did really want the macro :-O

Highcountry, you're right about the garden - that's where I've been spending the last few days!

[Roy C]

When I originally posted this thread I was in a particular mindset, and wanted to be convinced that the 70-200 was the best choice by being told how useful it was
Ah, if you had said this in the beginning Steve instead of stating the specific purpose you had in mind I would have answered differently. Although I rate the 70-200/4 very highly in optical terms, I rarely use mine as I cannot find a use for it. I already have a 17-40 for landscapes and a Macro lens (which I also rarely use) I originally bought the 70-200/4 and a 1.4tc for birds but when I got the 400/5.6 it became redundant - I ought to sell it I suppose.

[AC/DC]

Yeah, that was one of the things that was persuading me against it Roy - yes, it fills the focal length gap well, but how much will I use a lens in that gap?

[Nikon Kid]

You are quite right Terry, I have been on this 'craze' for over three years now which is a long time for me (my fads usually last about a year before I move on :-O ). I am starting to take it much to seriously which is worrying - thinking of just getting a G10 or the like for occasional snapping and maybe having a crack at something new (been looking at Canon Pro video cameras 8-P ).

Roy, I have whats called a rolling 5 year hobby change, usually have two hobby's going on at the same time, at the moment its
DSLR/Birding/Wildlife, with Model Trains OO layout in garage come games-room, if i went backwards with some of my hobby's they would be

DSLR photography
Birding
Digiscoping
Model Trains
Pinballs
Postcard Collecting
Slot machines/Racing games (Alwins 1950's)
Computers family Tree genealogy
Landrovers 4x4 defender 90 still got that one
Caravaning
American Cars
Silver Collecting
CB Radio Pirate Ham radio
Model Building Ships Aeroplanes
Radio Control Aeroplanes making and Flying
Water Skiing Speed boats
Course Fishing
Shooting Shotguns
Cactus growing and Collecting
Pilot Flying Lessons (never made it) because of hay-fever)
Cars Cars Cars in General

Basically each hobby had to fund the next hobby, well thats what I told the wife, if I sold up the model trains set
layout i could buy a new 500 f4 and tripod but I am just getting to old to carry it around just like you Roy :-O

I think a landscape lens, and a Fisheye they would be lighter......

BTW I can say I have never been bored.........

[Vectis Birder]

Hmmm. Must be a 'man thing'. I still have largely the same interests I have always had. ;) :-O

[Roy C]

Roy, I have whats called a rolling 5 year hobby change, usually have two hobby's going on at the same time, at the moment its
DSLR/Birding/Wildlife, with Model Trains OO layout in garage come games-room, if i went backwards with some of my hobby's they would be

DSLR photography
Birding
Digiscoping
Model Trains
Pinballs
Postcard Collecting
Slot machines/Racing games (Alwins 1950's)
Computers family Tree genealogy
Landrovers 4x4 defender 90 still got that one
Caravaning
American Cars
Silver Collecting
CB Radio Pirate Ham radio
Model Building Ships Aeroplanes
Radio Control Aeroplanes making and Flying
Water Skiing Speed boats
Course Fishing
Shooting Shotguns
Cactus growing and Collecting
Pilot Flying Lessons (never made it) because of hay-fever)
Cars Cars Cars in General

Basically each hobby had to fund the next hobby, well thats what I told the wife, if I sold up the model trains set
layout i could buy a new 500 f4 and tripod but I am just getting to old to carry it around just like you Roy :-O

I think a landscape lens, and a Fisheye they would be lighter......

BTW I can say I have never been bored.........
LOL that's quite a list Terry, I do a lot of family Tree genealogy at the moment (1911 census release has kept me busy for a month or two, updating my trees). My last big fad was playing competitive duplicate bridge.
I do find that I need some retail therapy every so often by the way of a biggish item every six months or so and I am overdo at the moment :-O