Sigma AF 18-50mm or Sigma AF 105mm

bradnailer

Sigma AF 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro Zoom Lens or Sigma AF 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro Lens
Has anyone used these lenses,nikon mount

pete4130

I've got the Sigma 18-50 2.8 macro. Cracker of a lens. Focus is fast enough, its very sharp even at 2.8. It's a touch wide for real macro work though but can give intersting results.

Here are a few shots I've taken with it. It's definitly a good lens to keep on your camera at all times.

I'm actually looking to sell mine at the minute. I've got a Sigma 24-70 2.8 en route. The only reason I'm selling the 18-50 is because I'll hopefully have a D3 next month and the 24-70 will suit the D3 better.

I'm actually looking to sell most of my D200 kit to help pay for my new toy so if anyone is interested head over to

http://www.adverts.ie/showproduct.php?product=34559

and check it out.

Pete.

Here are some pics I've shot with the 18-50 2.8:

Borderfox

Lovely shots Pete, I had the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 also and found it was a super lens and it will give you more flexibility than the macro. Lovely wide open but watch out for high contrast fringing. I think they do a HSM version now so check that out as the AF was the older mechanical version on mine and HSM is much better.

bradnailer

Nice lens and shots,is that 4th one Collins barricks, do you think the 105mm would be a better lens ?

Borderfox

The 105mm is a prime so yes it will be a better option but you have to multiply 105mm by the lens crop factor (1.5x) so its about 150mm which is not too handy if your out for the day taking pictures.

bradnailer

Would the 105mm make a good portrate lens

Borderfox

Its a bit long, a 50mm or an 85mm would be my choice.

bradnailer

So the 18-50mm would cover that as well, ummmm got me thinking thanks for the advice.:D

Shiny

I have the 18-50 and it is an excellent lens.

The 105mm would be a very good portrait lens but it is most
well known for its macro ability.
If i had money to burn I would get the 105mm for macro
work alone! :cool:

pete4130

As said above, the 105mm would be a bit long for portraiture, your subjects would start to lose a little depth. In saying that it would be fantastic for macro work!

The funny thing is, you think you have all the lenses you want and need....then you see another one that you don't really need but the more you htink about it, the more you seem to need more than when you first though about it! Like shiny said....if I had money to burn......

Your right, it is Collins Barrack as are the 3rd and 5th pics.

Borderfox

Yeah I suppose thats true

Macro
Wide Angle
Portrait
Telephoto

Thats about it?

bradnailer

I've got a 18-70mm Nikon kit lens, Sigma 70-300, most recent Sigma 50-500mm which I'm still getting used to but I'm very happy with it.
I'm trying to choose a 40th birthday present from my wife to me:D
But like you say there's always something, get the glass sorted and you'll start thinking about the body (keeps me out of bars);)

Borderfox

I think everybody should have a 70-200 f2.8 either VR or IS depending on what camp you are in, such a versatile lens and able to do nearly anything so well. I had both the Sigma 70-300 and the 50-500 and they were two great lenses and sold a lot of pictures from both, at this moment I am contemplating the Sigma 120-300 f2.8

Kilree

I have the Sigma 18-50 permanently on my 400d and it is an excellent performer. At the 50mm setting it actually has produced a sharper image than my nifty 50mm f1.8. The test was not exactly scientific being visual only but I was surprised at the result.

bradnailer

I was really intrested in the Macro properties of each lens, as it's listed in both their specs, I'm leaning towards the 105mm at the moment

pete4130

Ah go on for the 18-50.....remember mines for sale!

Borderfox

Pity your in wicklow Brad as if you were near I could give you a look at the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro, super lens and the focus is like so fast.

bradnailer

Borderfox wrote: »

Pity your in wicklow Brad as if you were near I could give you a look at the Canon 100mm f2.8 macro, super lens and the focus is like so fast.

You got any shots you've taken with it

Borderfox

original shot (Freddy the Spider)


100% crop


Original Shot (Doug the Goldfish)


100% crop

bradnailer

Wow nice, do you think the Sigma would give simular results ?

Borderfox

From what I have heard yes or very near to this, has it whetted your appetite for some macro? Heres a link to the Sigma review http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_105_28/index.htm

Borderfox

Canon review http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100_28/index.htm

bradnailer

Sorry Pete the 18-50mm just got blowen out of the water:D
Thanks for the help guys,now all I've got to do is sell it to my wife;)

Borderfox

Kidney's or Liver's work good too and you can keep the wife

Kilree

Here's one taken last August with the Sigma.

Borderfox

Nice shot Kilree

Borderfox

Heres two more of a Peace Lily this is from a RAW file and no sharpening applied at all
Original


100% Crop

pete4130

Well if it is the macro end of things then th 18-50 def gets blown out of the water. It has a close focusing distance and short depth of field but does fail to isolate the subject even at 50mm as its simply a bit too wide for proper macro work. Its great for Bokeh images though and a good all rounder lens.

Kilree

Thanks Borderfox and you too. I think I would have to accept that if you want true macro the Sigma would not as capable as the other lens mentioned. As an all rounder though with a limited ability to close focus it does produce good results.

Borderfox

I would agree too, if you want a good protrait/landscape lens the Sigma is an excellent choice.