On 2011-01-31 15:36 , Glen Berry wrote:
Are there any other macro lenses I should consider?
after spending a lot of time taking semi-macro shots with my 16-45 i asked here a while back to test my notion that a longer macro would suit me; i got lots of suggestions that 45-50mm was long enough, maybe i needed i refconverter, etc., but then i found a used Sigma EX (non-DG) 105/2.8 macro for $100 and my choice was settled for the time being (i also wound up with an SMC 100/4 bellows, but it's awaiting a better bellows before i use it much)
i got the 105 at the end of a season of shots of plants, aphids, bees etc. (which i had shot at 45mm 1:3.5 magnification or so) so i haven't used the 105 extensively in the macro range, but it's an amazingly sharp lens with somewhat controlled CA (there's a DG version which is supposed to be better), and it's very useful for non-macros shots as well; there's no question i'll be crawling around with it next summer for hundreds of hours
the biggest downside of the Sigma is the manual focus feel is not sublime, but it is good enough; i also sometimes wish it were weather sealed; if i had the money, i'd take a close look at the Pentax 100 WR macro, which i expect is lighter and has a better manual focus feel
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
