I have the Voigtlander 125mm f/2.5 1:1 macro no-IS/VR manual focus lens, and I love it for what it is best at - relatively static shots at a medium distance - it is handholdable under certain circumstances at 1/125 or faster, I shoot in burst mode and usually one of the shots is free of motion artifact at 100%.
I remember when Michael's article first came out, both of us were interested in this lens
However, I went with the Sigma 180mm f/2.8 APO, because it simply does
so much more than the elder lens, with (I would wager, given its stats) equal-level optics.
It is a true APO and the resolution is very good. It is a very good lens for traveling light, a lens to take on a 5 or 10 mile wildflower hike (typical complement is the 6D, 125mm V macro, and for possible landscape the 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake lens, which is darn good stopped down and a decent lens to use for pano, plus my 3 pound tripod/head, polarizer, wired shutter releases, pop-up reflector, and hiking necessaries).
I am not sure the Sigma is a "true APO" (whatever that means, if there's no standardized definition), but it is labeled as such ... and has rave reviews from all who have actually put their hands on it.
However, I cannot say I "travel light" with it, given its weight of 3.6 lb (although it feels like a toy compared to the Sigma 150-600, which weighs 6.3 lb
).
But I don't mind, as it's clamped on my RRS tripod, and slung over my shoulder, and when it comes to shooting time the tripod is carrying the weight, so I just get to enjoy the reach, the excellent optics, plus the modern amenities.
Some insects can benefit from more distance, and the 180 is a great focal length.
Agreed. Some insects. The occasional, unafraid bird, etc.
180mm is sometimes inconvenient for plant and fungus photography due to the need to sweep intervening stems/leaves out of the way.
True ... or very low-to-the-ground, tiny flowers if you're trying to get an upward perspective.
The Voigtlander optics are so far superior to the old Canon 180 that my 180 leaves home mostly for snake and butterfly expeditions.
Sadly, if you look at the LenScore stats, every modern macro lens is "far superior" to the old Canon 180
I slap the 1.4x teleconverter on the 180 for snakes when I expect to be finding timber rattlesnakes or (always grumpy) cottonmouths, distance is good when you are observing venomous snakes. I will take the slight optical degradation of a teleconverter over the possibility of upsetting the snake.
Bah, you don't need an extender on a 180mm to photograph snakes. I took
this photo of a pygmy rattler with the 1
00mm f/2.8L, from about 18" away
Snakes can only strike maybe 1/3rd their body length, and US pit vipers have to coil to strike.
From a coiled position, it is quite easy to stay well out of their striking range and take a photo of them.
Cheers,
Jack