Re: Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- From: "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 22:18:07 -0700
"Mark Conrad" <NoMailAccepted@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:290420061635275314%NoMailAccepted@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Being a rank digital newbie, I let a salesman talk me into buying a
combo Canon 5D "package" including the non-Canon Sigma 105mm macro lens
instead of a regular Canon macro lens.
He claimed the Sigma was the better macro, but I suspect his motives.
Did I goof? Be brutally truthful guys, I can take it.
Also, is there a noticeable difference in the quality of the final
image between using a macro lens vs a "regular" lens, when shooting
non-macro scenes?
I can't afford both regular and macro lenses right now, however I do
want to eventually wind up with "quality lenses".
Thanks for any opinions,
Mark-
The Sigma 105 f2.8 Macro is one of the best respected Macro lenses on the
market, and one of two from third party mfrs. that rate up with the OEM
lenses.
Macro lenses tend to be sharper than that lens' mfr's regular line of
lenses, because sharpness is so critical for macro work. The only drawback
is that they can be unflatteringly sharp for portrait work.
--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
.
- References:
- Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- From: Mark Conrad
- Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- Prev by Date: Re: Would like recomondation for a Canon lens for portrait work
- Next by Date: Re: Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- Previous by thread: Re: Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- Next by thread: Re: Mistake by using a Sigma 105mm macro as "general purpose"?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|