Whats the cheapest combination for shooting macro with the D70

[crazypaladin]

I thinking of getting Sigma 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Macro. Is this good enough?

In my opinion, the magnification is 1:4 but the lens do produce soft images especially around the edges. Not really a good lens for macro-works but for the price it offers, it's quite ok. I would advice you consider the 70-300 counterpart which at least offer 1:2 magnification (see earlier posts for more info)

 

[Kenji]

But actually I wanted to get a normal zoom lens. Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Compact Hyperzoom lens. But saw there's a new lens which is Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro, I believe this is for macro, but then if this lens is able to act as a normal zoom lens, I think it's ok to get it. Right?

 

[Witness]

50 mm in reverse or with closeups??

 

[MichaelLee]

my advice to u is get a true macro lens...

I understand that a true marco lens is of course give the best quality for marco picture.

but the thread is aksing for the cheapest solution.

Concerning the cost, jazzart might be interested considering ;

1) 50mm f1.8 with a BR-2A reversal ring
2) 50mm f1.8 with extension tube
3) 50mm f1.8 with Nikon No 6T
4) sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super II

Of the above alternative...which combination give the best macro picture ??

 

[Adzz]

I understand that a true marco lens is of course give the best quality for marco picture.

but the thread is aksing for the cheapest solution.

Concerning the cost, jazzart might be interested considering ;

1) 50mm f1.8 with a BR-2A reversal ring (no metering)
2) 50mm f1.8 with extension tube (no metering)
3) 50mm f1.8 with Nikon No 6T (with metering)
4) sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super II (with metering)

Of the above alternative...which combination give the best macro picture ??

Just a question: The sigma lens offers up to 1:2 ratio. How do we calculate the new ratio if a 25mm extension tube is added?

 

[jazzart]

But actually I wanted to get a normal zoom lens. Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Compact Hyperzoom lens. But saw there's a new lens which is Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro, I believe this is for macro, but then if this lens is able to act as a normal zoom lens, I think it's ok to get it. Right?

Has anyone got this lens? Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro. How is it compared to the sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super II. What is the difference in terms of Price, usability for Macro, and Zoom.

Does it mean that if I were to get the Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro, I would have the best of both worlds, (wide angle, Zoom, and Macro) and that I would not need to change lens so frequently?


Forgive the silly questions...I have just bought the D70 and am really new to Photography, and would like to make sure that I get the correct lens for the limited amount of money that I have.

 

[justarius]

Has anyone got this lens? Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro. How is it compared to the sigma 70-300 APO Macro Super II. What is the difference in terms of Price, usability for Macro, and Zoom.

Does it mean that if I were to get the Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Macro, I would have the best of both worlds, (wide angle, Zoom, and Macro) and that I would not need to change lens so frequently?


Forgive the silly questions...I have just bought the D70 and am really new to Photography, and would like to make sure that I get the correct lens for the limited amount of money that I have.

At the risk of wrongfully bashing something I've never used, I would think that instead of getting the best of 3 worlds, you would be more like getting at best a 'mediocre' part of each. True macro lenses required highly precise optics to ensure flat field sharpness. Good wide angle lenses require correction to minimise distortion. Good telephoto lenses need special elements to reduce chromatic aberration. Each type of lens by itself isn't cheap. Combine all three together and the only way the lens can be good in each is if you are as rich as Bill Gates (cos it's isn't going to be affordable. Or even feasible).

That being said however, if you are only dipping your toe into the water and want to experience a little of each, than the 28-300 Macro lens is going to be a better idea than a dedicated lens, primarily because it's going to be easier on the wallet, as well as being more convenient as a travel lens. I travel with 4 primes lens and sometimes the lens changing is a bit too much.