Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: lense for macro shot

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Jurong West
    Posts
    22

    Default lense for macro shot

    hi everyone,

    it's me again (recently seemed to post quite a bit. ). Need advice again. I am considering getting a macro lense, but don't really have much idea. Which one should I get? (budget constraint)

    1. Sigma - 50mm f2.8 EX Macro OR
    2. Sigma - 70-300mmF4-5.6 DL MACRO SUPER

    will this "Sigma 70-300mmF4-5.6 DL MACRO SUPER" good enough for Macro shot or should I really get the macro lense? Price diff is quite a lot though.

    Thank you everyone...

  2. #2

    Default

    I have not used these 2 lens before so cannot compare the quality

    Usually the prime lens has better quality than tele zoom
    See my Photo Gallery at the Clubsnap

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hstn_asia
    hi everyone,

    it's me again (recently seemed to post quite a bit. ). Need advice again. I am considering getting a macro lense, but don't really have much idea. Which one should I get? (budget constraint)

    1. Sigma - 50mm f2.8 EX Macro OR
    2. Sigma - 70-300mmF4-5.6 DL MACRO SUPER

    will this "Sigma 70-300mmF4-5.6 DL MACRO SUPER" good enough for Macro shot or should I really get the macro lense? Price diff is quite a lot though.

    Thank you everyone...
    Basic question ....... what Macro you want to take? ....

    Reproduction? Insect? Still object? Flowers? etc etc?


    Anyway, for the budget constrainted 70-300 should be good enough, the quality is not as half as good as a 50mm f/2.8 though.

  4. #4

    Default

    I think the 50/2.8's optical quality is a world ahead of the 70-300. If you intend to do some serious macro work the 50/2.8 is probably the better option.
    My Personal Folio (of random events and things)

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,358

    Default

    Tried the 50mm Macro and its a sharp lens when stopped down from f3.5 onwards...
    The equipment can only bring you so far - the rest of the photographic journey is done by you.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Jurong West
    Posts
    22

    Default

    hi everyone, thanks for your suggestion.

    mainly wanted to use it for flowers and insects. Do you think 70-300 is enough? 50mm is quite costly for me...

    And do you think this 70-300mm MACRO SUPER from Sigma is considered ok?

    hehehe... after picking up this hobby and started to realize that everything is $$$$$

  7. #7

    Default

    wat bout poring in wee bit more money got the tamron 90mm macro....heard its quite good....

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Witness
    wat bout poring in wee bit more money got the tamron 90mm macro....heard its quite good....
    how much is this baby?

  9. #9

    Default

    u can see the discussion in the nikon section

    so far we can get is ard $550+ bah..

    seems lots of pple intersted but dunno if anyone doing a MO or not

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
  •