Page 1 of 1
macro lens
Posted:
Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:34 pmby lkgrainger
Hi all,
I'm looking to get a macro of some description.
Any Ideas and prices?
Where to get in Brisy?
Re: macro lens
Posted:
Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:39 pmby fozzie
lkgrainger/Leigh,
lkgrainger wrote:Hi all,
I'm looking to get a macro of some description.
Any Ideas and prices?
Where to get in Brisy?
Refer to Bargin section, under heading of lens lust:
http://www.d70users.com/viewtopic.php?t=1573
Posted:
Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:24 pmby MHD
I am hopelessly enamoured by the 105/2.8 micro-nikkor!
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:25 amby shakey
I've just got the Tamron 90 mm 2.8 Di. (12 hours ago). Impressed so far. $650.00 (incl GST) from Sydney. I'm sure it can be got cheaper than that if you keep looking
shakey
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:14 amby sirhc55
I might as well add my 105mm Sigma to the soup - Nikon, Tamron and Sigma all produce excellent macro lenses
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 4:22 amby Onyx
I'll chime in with my two cents 60mm micro-Nikkor. Acts like a 90 on a DSLR, very small and compact and gets REALLY close (physically).
thanks
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:58 pmby lkgrainger
cool thanks guys.
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:49 pmby Neeper
Besides price, is there a big difference between the Sigma 105 and Nikon 105?
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 7:39 pmby wile_E
Neeper wrote:Besides price, is there a big difference between the Sigma 105 and Nikon 105?
we managed to compare the two today at the mini-meet. i was quite surprised that the nikkor was quite a bit bigger (without the lens hood) and heavier than the sigma.
other than that, the finish on both was basically on par (the nikkor wins ever so slighly). unfort i didn't have my camera, so couldn't tell image quality... i'm sure others here will chip in with their thoughts
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 9:08 pmby fozzie
Neeper,
sirhc55 wrote:I might as well add my 105mm Sigma to the soup - Nikon, Tamron and Sigma all produce excellent macro lenses
Chris pretty well sums it up.
It will basically come down to your personal choice. Many on the forum will say Nikon, and others Sigma. The ball is in your court.
thanks
Posted:
Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:06 pmby lkgrainger
thanks I'm making a few enq now.
Posted:
Sun Apr 24, 2005 3:34 amby Neeper
hmm... I have to go to the store and play I think. Still can't decide!
Posted:
Sun Apr 24, 2005 8:21 amby fozzie
Neeper,
Neeper wrote:hmm... I have to go to the store and play I think. Still can't decide!
You may want to also try the Tamron SP AF90mm F/2.8 Di Macro 1:1
which will be cheaper (I do not know your budget) than the Nikon and Sigma:
http://www.maxwell.com.au/products/tamr ... _272e.html
Posted:
Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:50 pmby horstflotow
[quote="wile_E"][quote="Neeper"]Besides price, is there a big difference between the Sigma 105 and Nikon 105?[/quote]
we managed to compare the two today at the mini-meet. i was quite surprised that the nikkor was quite a bit bigger (without the lens hood) and heavier than the sigma.
other than that, the finish on both was basically on par (the nikkor wins ever so slighly). unfort i didn't have my camera, so couldn't tell image quality... i'm sure others here will chip in with their thoughts[/quote]
I've got the Sigma, it's a great lens, the only annoying thing is when it has to change focus it's not the fastest and hunts a lot (especially when you focus on something moving). Other than that, it's sharp, bright and very light so you can always stick it in your pack and take it along
A collegue here has the Nikon and it looks like a nice lens too, focus is much faster (as you'd expect for 2x the price). I (being an amateur and all that) couldn't tell that there is a significant difference in the quality of the shots from these two lenses and I made my decision with my checkbook.
Regards
Horst