 Mike W. Stoker |
Macro I'm looking to get into taking macro pics, does anyone have equipment ideas? I have a Rebel 2000 Digital and thinking about a Canon 100 2.8 macro or a Sigma 105 2.8 macro. Any opinions?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Karma Wilson |
Opinions will vary. I haven't used the Canon but own the Sigma and love it. It's a great lens--very sharp, contrasty, and lovely color rendetion. I bought mine for $300 on ebay. It's opened up a whole new world in photography for me. Karma
|
|
|
|
||
|
Karma Wilson |
Opinions will vary. I haven't used the Canon but own the Sigma and love it. It's a great lens--very sharp, contrasty, and lovely color rendetion. I bought mine for $300 on ebay. It's opened up a whole new world in photography for me. Karma
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mike W. Stoker |
Thank you for the response, I am leaning more to the Sigma because of price and from what I've read quality. A person with my experiance will not be able to tell the difference or so I'm told. Thanks agin!!!!
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
You could have excellent macro lenses and the additional things necesary for macro for about what you'd spend for one new autofocus lens. All the camera makers made excellent manual focus macro lenses. They are very cheap these days. The camera body to go with a macro lens may cost less than the lens. You can avoid the absurd prices charged for autofocus extension tubes by just setting up a dedicated manual focus macro system. Autofocus is no help with macro, anyway. For example,
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||