Love that Macro Lens! (Sigma 150 / 2.8 Macro -- they finally did something right!)

JJ: "Are you happy with the Sigma macro?"

JJ, I love it! It is large and just a bit heavy, which can help to steady it, and of course, it qualifies for the "Rock Hard™" exercise program.

But it is a 150mm lens, so it's going to be heavier than shorter lengths. I have used it on D200 and D3, and it works great on both. The HSM, equivalent to Nikon's AFS, ultrasonic focusing mechanism built into the lens means it will auto-focus on D40 's and the rest, AFAIK. And when you're not auto-focusing well into the macro,and hunting back to infinity, which can happen in low light with close subjects with any dedicated macro / AF lens, then focusing is almost as fast as Nikon's best...that I have used: 70-200VR, 17-55G, and 24-70G.

Focusing is fast and accurate, and the lens is very sharp. Very, very sharp. It has very good correction for color plane focus: low CA's (chromatic aberrations); I consider this very important for regular and macro lenses. Don't listen when someone tells you you can just correct for this in software. Sure, you can, somewhat, but you will always have to try to fix this problem with your pictures because your lens didn't work well enough! Get a good lens to begin with, with minimal CA's (all lenses have some degree of inability to focus all colors on the same plane (CA) ) :)

I like the extra 'reach' or distance from the lens that the longer focal length gives you over a 105mm, 90mm, 70mm and 60mm. I have shot a lot of small scenes at shows and I can reach right in there for shots that have to be cropped out of other people's work, full frame in mine. I have also hand-held the D200 / Sigma 150 / 2.8 Macro combination at speeds as slow as 1/5 of a second with little discernible camera movement. I can't do that with my 135/2.0 Nikkor. I have trouble holding it still at 1/60 " for some reason....

I do like this lens. It has good color rendition, excellent sharpness, good auto-focus and is very hand-holdable. It's also rugged, as I've dragged it all around and had no problems. I think it does very well with portraits too, but you have to back up to get more than a head shot!

Negatives: weight, size, price. It's cheaper than a Nikon 105 / 2.8 VR, and about as good. It's the best, if not only good Sigma lens I've ever used (I've owned or used a few real dogs from Sigma!)

$599.00 from B+H

More samples from this lens


Other Macro lenses I would consider:
Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Micro $755.00 (full frame, no aperture ring)

Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED Macro $569.95 (AF-S with SWM, ED glass, 9 blade diaphragm, CRC, cool coatings: SIC + NanoCrystal) -(expensive, not in stores yet, short working distance)

Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 SP Di Macro (1:1) $369.89 (full frame, aperture ring, screw-drive focusing)

200mm f/4D ED-IF AF Micro Telephoto Nikkor $1339.95(Adorama) (Big, heavy, expensive, sharp, slow, slow AutoFocus)

Used: 105/2.8 AIS Nikkor, 60/2.8 AF-D Nikkor should be good buys, under $400 and $250 respectively.

/..

D3 Journal: Building a Portable Lighting System: Triggering Cff-Camera Strobes

Choosing between available flash activation systems gets more complicated with a camera such as the D3 which lacks a 'commander' for CLS / AWL. The SU-800 does seem like the most logical choice:
- most creative strobe use is off camera;
- the SB-800 is much smaller + lighter than SB-800 so it's more ergonomic when used primarily for commanding other CLS units;
- it's cheaper than an SB-800;
- there is no built-in or popup flash on the D3 (should be!)

But, the SU-800 costs $240-260US, and that's 250/320(~78%) of the cost of an SB-800.

Radio poppers are a bit of a kludge conceptually, but self reputed to work really well. Each unit does either Tx or RX and costs ~$175-$225US (has anyone used them, recommend??) They have a large range and are designed to preserve the operation of CLS while overcoming the distance, obstruction and direction limitations inherent with this otherwise excellent system design.

Plain-jane radio triggers of any kind appear to be able to trigger with most any triggerable camera-mount flash or studio strobe unit. You can spend more for better reliability and distance of operation, or can modify (pretty simply, with the right parts and skillz) the inexpensive, generic units. These generic units cost as little as about $15.00@, while at the top end for price, and hopefully reliability, Pocket Wizards run about $200 to $300 each unit (Rx + Tx).

Back to the D3: most studio work is performed within the relatively short distance range of CLS, and so is much of outdoor work. But working in daylight, you are likely to need the additional (apparent) range of the SU-800 when it's bright sunlight, or to increase range. Still, the best of all worlds seems to be a fairly expensive path when considering range, reliability, ergonomics (weight and size), and utility: combine an SU-800 with SB-6/800's and use CLS via Radio-poppers.

I recently pulled the trigger on Cactus V2s (3Rx and 1Tx), which should now be winging their way here from Taiwan (about 6.7% of the distance light travels in 1 second.) To shoot weddings, events and clubs I'll still need a decent bracket and a flash cord.

No longer are PC cords enough: making use of bracket-mounted off camera flash requires a TTL cord, such as the SC-28 (most recent plain TTL/iTTL cord), SC-29 (same as 28, but with a focusing light) or maybe a (now discontinued) SC-17. The 28 + 29 both attach at both ends using the hot-shoe schema, while the SC-17 appears to plug into a socket(PC? 10-pin? 3-pin?). You can use radio triggers to trip the bracket-mounted unit, but I believe it requires that you use the top end models; the Cactus slaves of all stripes are reputed to fire randomly when used at less than 3 to 4 feet from each other or the transmitter.

I really like the simplicity and effectiveness of CLS / AWL. It's frequently 'stupid proof', outthinking the small mental errors of its operators and returning stunning results like 85 to 95% of the time. The fact that it works through the camera's own exposure system means it usually works as well as the camera itself, which with the D3 is quite good (nearly 'stupid proof', again.) Given all this, it might be worthwhile to spend the money and pull the trigger on a more expensive system or combination of systems and parts. It's expensive enough though to want to have enough use to let the equipment pay for itself.

/..

Fear and Loathing of Photographers in Public

Terrorists seek to instill fear. When that is done, their mission is accomplished. Are your local, state and national officials, and some of the populace too, afraid of you taking pictures?

Many wise generals and leaders, since long before Sun Tzu, have realized that the most effective weapons in any conflict can be psychological. Fear, lack of will and resolve, and more can be implemented through self-induction by the enemy. Terrorists do this with the smallest amount of effort: no one has to invade your shores with an army when attacking 0.0001% of the people or country will instill world-wide fear.

You have to ask yourself if you and your country are willing to go the extent it takes to win the current 'war', or is it better to try to survive in fear? Oddly, it looks like one of the most effective weapons western cultures have in this 'war' is significant reduction in use of fossil fuels. That's a funny thing, isn't it? We support our enemy by depending on their exports, we fund them and sell them weapons....

Photography may become a safe practice again when we screw our heads back on right and observe the world right in front of our noses. You will still need a model release to publish photographs with recognizable people in them for non-editorial purposes, in the US -- other countries vary, some day by day. Property that may be confused as to ownership or aegis in its trademarked or copyrighted design would need a property release. You invade privacy when you go beyond a 'normal' or normally available view -- such as using a 50mm lens on an FX or 35mm frame to take a picture from a public sidewalk of someone or something that has no expectation (explicit or implied) of privacy: such as activity in a privy. Private activity carried out in public, such as cleaning your nose with your finger does not carry any expectation of privacy, but it may represent a person in a bad light. Most editors will stay away from privacy and bad-light issues when they choose a picture to publish.

/..