Not quite compact nor cheap though, right?
And hadn't we established that 90mm was already way too long? Where
are you going with 180mm, Mark? You're doing it wrong, mate. Anything
longer than 35mm for a macro lens is photographic suicide.
Now that I got that off my chest, I'm off to bed.
G'night!
—M.
\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com
http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment
On 3 December 2012 20:26, Mark Roberts <[email protected]> wrote:
> Christine Aguila wrote:
>
>>Doesn't Mark Roberts have this lens as well. I think he showed us pics from
>>it as well. If i remember correctly, they were lovely. Cheers, Christine
>
> Yep. The Sigma 180/3.5 Macro is a brilliant lens. Probably my second
> most used lens for nature photography (after the DA*16-50/2.8). It's
> sharp, sharp, sharp and built like the proverbial tank. Also works
> extremely well as a telephoto at long distance (not all macro lenses
> work well at non-macro distances).
>
>
> --
> Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
> www.robertstech.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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.
--
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.
