Which one is the least discussed 4/3 (AF) lens ?

Started Oct 26, 2012 | Discussions thread
Pinco Pallino
Pinco Pallino New Member • Posts: 18
Re: One I would love to know more about...

R2elk wrote:

Pinco Pallino wrote:

R2elk wrote:

TrapperJohn wrote:

is the Sigma 150 F2.8 Macro.

Saw one pop up for sale used last year, it was the first I had heard of it in a 4/3 mount. It sold quickly, and I haven't seen one for sale since, at least not on the used market.

Is it really a cost effective substitute for the ZD 150F2? Worth getting if another one turns up? Inquiring minds want to know...

IMO The Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro is not a substitute for the ZD 150mm f/2. The Sigma is what it is and that is an excellent macro lens. Even with the focus limiter it is a slow focusing lens.

I could be wrong, but I thought it was a fast focusing lens. Which camera did you use it on?

E-300, E-30, E-3, and E-5. I would not consider any of the macro lenses as having fast focusing. I also would not consider any of the Sigma lenses that I have had as having fast focusing compared to the non macro ZD lenses that I have.

I duno, maybe the slowness comes from your cameras. I heard very often from good photographers that Sigma 150 is a very fast focusing lens. Why take my word for it, here is from slrgear


Thanks to its hypersonic motor (HSM), AF operation is fast and precise, with a minimum of hunting.

Lenstip tests are not in disagreement either


In the case of autofocus mechanism we always try to asses the speed, the level of noise, its accuracy and whether or not it shows any front or back focus tendencies. When it comes to these categories the Sigma 2.8/150 equipped with an HSM motor achieved a very good result three times out of four. Its autofocus works very silently and quickly and, what is not so often for Sigma lenses, it doesn’t have even a trace of front or back focus.

In contrast to Olympus Zuiko 150


Autofocus works relatively loudly. It’s also quite slow when working at full scale, when from infinity we try to focus on a close object. It can even think for a few second, or stop working at all, then. That’s why it’s better to set the limit, as there are no troubles after that, and the mechanism spreads its wings and works very fast.
Some complains we can have to autofocus accuracy. An expensive lens combined with a top system body in good studio conditions, resulted in 11% misses. It may not be extremely much, but you could expect more from this set.

Tell us, why should we believe you? Do you have some pictures that demonstrate where Sigma fails?

The Sigma lens list that I have or have had includes the Sigma 55-200mm, Sigma 105mm macro, Sigma 150mm macro and the Sigma 300-800mm (Sigmonster).

For Collin, in one way only I preferred the Sigma 105mm macro over the Sigma 150mm macro because it is simpler to tell when you are at maximum magnification because the lens barrel stops extending. You don't have that instant feedback with the non barrel extending 150mm macro. However it is the 150mm macro that I now always use and the 105 mm macro always sits.

-- hide signature --

Comments and critiques always welcome.
Bob K.

-- hide signature --


Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow