Nikon 200mm F4 Micro Ais vs. the Sigma 180mm F3.5 Macro D EX HSM

I am still on the fence about which micro to get and really don't know enough about this category to choose. The Nikon 200 f4 AIS is a manual lens vs. the newer Sigma. I should mention that I do own a Sigma 1.4x teleconverter already. The Nikon D7000 and D70 are the bodies I own. Please enlighten me! Both are about the same price at $479 and $500 which is my max. Insects and flowers will probably be my main macro subjects.

Thanks!

I don't know the Sigma from spaghetti, but I can tell you I really covet AF when using my Nikon. I'm "of the age" where the eyes aren't what they once were. By the time I get the MF all lined up, the insect is somewhere over the horizon.

In looking over the specs of these two lenses one thing jumped out at me. The Nikon 200/4 AI-s only focuses down to 1:2. The Sigma goes down to 1:1. That might be important for shooting insects. The Sigma is also a newer lens and might have slightly better glass than the older Nikon design.

I have a newer Nikon 200/4 AF with ED glass and it's a stellar performer but if I was choosing between the older AI-s version and the Sigma, I think I'd go with the Sigma.

In contrast to Hank, I don't like auto focus when doing macro work. And no, Hank, I won't trade lenses with you.

Don: I think you've made a wise decision with this focal length. I rarely use AF with my macro lenses unless I'm chasing a butterfly or dragonfly and need to hand hold. Also getting to 1:1 is a big deal in flora photography IMO. Because of those two factors I would be inclined to recommend the Sigma. >=))>

I'd like to "fourth" what Hank, Mark, and Bill said about the magnification. If you're serious about macro, you'll want more and more magnification. If working distance is important for a shy subject, you can put a zoom (say 100 - 200) on extension tubes and get down to around 1:2 before you lose sharpness. With my Olympus film camera, I used my 300 on a bellows for dragon fly and butterfly shots because of the working distance, but when I wanted magnification I pulled out a short mount (required extension tubes to mount) 85mm that was designed to go to 2:1 and it was great.

The Sigma is very sharp.

I've never used the 200/4 Micro AiS, but I've heard that in terms of optics, it wasn't quite as good as the new 200/4 AF-D is. I'd go for the Sigma (also because the D70 doesn't meter with the AiS-lens).

Check out the Tamron 180mm macro, I personally think its the sharpest of the tele macros.

Another vote for either the Sigma or Tamron. Newer design, newer coatings, and the AF can indeed be handy. Both Sigma and Tamron are well known for great macro lenses.


Kent in SD