1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG macro

Discussion in 'Photography Forums' started by seany, Sep 13, 2005.

  1. seany

    seany
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Manchester city
    Ratings:
    +1
    My 35mm F1.4 L is going to be with me in the next week. When it comes i know it's going to become my main standard lens, the classic 50mm (plus a couple of mm) with the crop on my 20D. I've got a 50 1.4, great lens as we all know. I know my 50's going to take a back seat to the 35. I've been thinking about getting a macro lens, the new efs 60 is a nice lens it's razor sharp and from the shots i've seen it's a stella lens. It's MTF chart is of the scale, but it's efs and i just cant bring myself to go with efs.

    The simga also has great reviews, takes amazing macro shots and is future proof. It's MTF chart is also very impressive, but shots speak better then charts sometimes http://www.pbase.com/cedric_g/best_of_macro

    So what i was thinking was selling my 50 and getting the sigma. I don't want to sell my 85 1.8 and get the 100mm macro even though i could use it for portraits to. The 85 was made with portriats in mind and it really does it so well, and it's faster then the 100mm.


    What do people think about the above? would not even enter my head if my 35mm wasn't on it's way. But i've been dreaming of this lens so i think a 50 mm macro would suit me well. As i know i'd go to my 35 every time over the 50 1.4
     
  2. RobertP

    RobertP
    Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2002
    Messages:
    522
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Woodford Essex
    Ratings:
    +0
    Can't see you being happy with 2.8 after a 1.4 - even if it is less used now.

    How important is macro to you? Spacer rings would get you macro of sorts if its just an occaisonal thing.

    oh and a 50mm macro is going to put you right on top of your subject.
     
  3. sorbiegunner

    sorbiegunner
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Messages:
    184
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +2
    It seems to me that what camera equipment has in common with cars is that they lose half their value the minute you take them out of the showroom.
    The difference is that, unlike cars, a good lens will last a lifetime if looked after.
    So you would not get for your lens what it's worth, or anywhere near what it cost you to buy. If it's going to sit in a cupboard for the rest of it's life then sell it, but if you're only selling it reluctantly in order to buy the other one then keep it and save up a bit longer.
     
  4. tomson

    tomson
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    1,918
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Location:
    Berk'amsted
    Ratings:
    +187
    Why not go for something like a Sigma 105mm 2.8 macro, that way you could probably afford to keep your 50mm. It would also be a useful addition to your collection, especially when you need a bit more reach than you get with your 85mm.

    I've seen a used one with a hood going for 190quid.
     
  5. seany

    seany
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Manchester city
    Ratings:
    +1
    It's not an an issue of finance i could affored the 100mm or the 105 it's a case if the 50 mm will get the use it deserves. The aperture is not such an issue as it would be used as a macro lens more then anything where it's better to have a good depth of field so i'd be closing it down. Working distance is less then the 100/105 but as the above gallery shows can still get some stunning shots

    I'm getting a 135L Tom, so more then likely anthing in the 100mm range for anything other then macro i'd go to the 135

    Lens will lose money of course. As condyk shown though buying lenses of kerso, with the full international warrenty he's been selling his L gear over here for what he paid for it. But i never bought my 50 that way so i'd not lose half the amount but i lose, but then i've had so much joy from it the moeny was worth it. If i go to http://www.onestop-digital.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=24_28&products_id=117 it's £158 i know well that i'll pretty much get round that for my 50mm

    I've been looking at the kenko extention tubes, from the advice i've had on potn they'd be perfect for my 135 as they so i might look in to that. But even still that still means that the 50 is going to get far less use then the 35 when it arrives. i'm saying that i don't know yet but i can imagin that being the case.
     
  6. seany

    seany
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Manchester city
    Ratings:
    +1

Share This Page

Loading...