Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Seeking Advice Sigma AF105 f2.8

  1. #1

    Default Seeking Advice Sigma AF105 f2.8

    hi folks,anyone own this lens.And if u do,how is it performing?tot of adding it to my equipment list,care to share your experience....



    thx

  2. #2

    Default Re: Seeking Advice Sigma AF105 f2.8

    Originally posted by RAIN_MAN
    hi folks,anyone own this lens.And if u do,how is it performing?tot of adding it to my equipment list,care to share your experience....



    thx
    great lens for its price. extremely sharp glass. don't let the slow AF bother you if you're really into macro photography.

  3. #3

    Default

    I owned one and I say it's optically fantastic, good solid built, comes with hood and reasonable price. Good for portrait, still sharp at 2.8. It rates 4.1 (optical quality) at photodo.com.

    Focusing a bit slow but tolerable, I guess you'll hardly use AF for macro though.

    Highly recommended.

  4. #4

    Default

    Originally posted by Sgt. Pepper
    I owned one and I say it's optically fantastic, good solid built, comes with hood and reasonable price.
    personally i wouldn't say good solid built, as the finish rubs of after some time, and the gold ring is just a sticky piece of gold tape! AF ring becomes loose too after much use.

    but all in all, still a great value lens!

  5. #5

    Default

    arnd how much does it cost?
    brand new and used...

  6. #6

    Default

    new shld be around $650. but then again it was 6 months ago when i asked...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    any difference between the different mounts?

  8. #8

    Default

    Diff mount makes no difference. New one arround 580$.

  9. #9

    Default

    Its a beautiful lens. Nice wide manual focus ring with a long focus throw. Its metal construction brings it a notch over its competitiors. Optically, I believe it can hold its own against the brand name equivalents (never did a formal test nor found it necessary).

  10. #10
    Member Koh Li Kuan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Bedok Reservoir
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Originally posted by munfai
    new shld be around $650. but then again it was 6 months ago when i asked...
    MS Color quoted $590 a week ago.

    LK

  11. #11

    Default

    If you are referring to the Sigma 105mm EX Macro f2.8, I can highly recommend it.

    Optically very good and sharp. It's the only lens I have which I am tempted to use manual focus, because of the excellent focus ring. AF is noisy.

    I bought mine secondhand at $400. There was a problem using it with Canon EOS 10D (aperture would not stop down - Err 99) but Sigma Marketing Singapore re-chipped the lens for me for free, and it's working great now.

    I use mine mainly for converting colour negatives to digital. I use it at f8.0, mirror lockup enabled, with a remote release, against a white light box. Batch convert in PS -> Invert and Autolevels. Result is much better than using my Epson film scanner. And heck of a lot faster. I can "scan" a roll of film in less than 5 minutes.

  12. #12

    Default

    Originally posted by StreetShooter
    I use mine mainly for converting colour negatives to digital. I use it at f8.0, mirror lockup enabled, with a remote release, against a white light box. Batch convert in PS -> Invert and Autolevels. Result is much better than using my Epson film scanner. And heck of a lot faster. I can "scan" a roll of film in less than 5 minutes.
    Not a bad idea at all.

  13. #13

    Default

    even though it's a macro lens there's no problem using it for normal shooting rite??

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    I've compared and tested between the Nikon and the Nikon mount, but ...

    Originally posted by BraveHart
    Its a beautiful lens. Nice wide manual focus ring with a long focus throw. Its metal construction brings it a notch over its competitiors. Optically, I believe it can hold its own against the brand name equivalents (never did a formal test nor found it necessary).

  15. #15

    Default

    Originally posted by weg
    even though it's a macro lens there's no problem using it for normal shooting rite??
    of course... it can still focus at infinity!

  16. #16

    Default

    Originally posted by AJ23
    I've compared and tested between the Nikon and the Nikon mount, but ...
    but what??? cannot tell the difference rite?

  17. #17

    Default

    thx folks! will take your advice,get one this wkend.....wat abt
    diffuser filter?which brand produce the best effect for portrait?

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    but but but ... it's the price that makes me to get which. I like the price of the Sigma and the lense of Nikon.

    Nikon is better than Sigma, Nikon's slightly sharper, quieter and faster in focusing. So still ...

    Originally posted by munfai
    but what??? cannot tell the difference rite?

  19. #19

    Default

    Originally posted by AJ23
    but but but ... it's the price that makes me to get which. I like the price of the Sigma and the lense of Nikon.

    Nikon is better than Sigma, Nikon's slightly sharper, quieter and faster in focusing. So still ...
    Do you normally use AF for macro?

    Focusing may be quieter, but, what makes you say that nikon is "sharper" than sigma?

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Town of Queens doing PORT-9YOU
    Posts
    12,716

    Default

    Don't have a macro lense yet, was doing the comparison at the shop. As for AF for macro or not, I think it depends?

    As for "sharper", was looking at the pics taken by both the lenses on the same camera body, on a printout. To me, it looks that Nikon lense is slightly sharper. No?

    That's why I am still in a dilenma whether to get the Sigma or the Nikon. The Sigma is about half the price of Nikon...

    Originally posted by Sgt. Pepper
    Do you normally use AF for macro?

    Focusing may be quieter, but, what makes you say that nikon is "sharper" than sigma?
    Last edited by AJ23; 3rd July 2003 at 12:11 AM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •