Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="nickt" data-source="post: 667884" data-attributes="member: 4923">Things I have learned.... Working distance is from the front of lens to subject. But its sometimes hard to find this important number. Often what you get is minimum focus distance. This is from subject to focal plane. You need to do some math or googling to figure out the actual working distance. They don't make it easy, lol. Then there are some external focus lenses out there like the old Tamron 90. They get longer as you zoom. That adds more thinking to get from minimum focus distance to working distance.I have the Tamron 60 for a long time. Great (DX) lens but it doesn't get a lot of attention. I then picked up the Sigma 105 on a good rebate. At the very closest distance, I was not wowed by it vs the 60. But as I move back just a bit, I start to realize the longer focal length. My point is that at minimum 1:1 macro range, your focal length doesn't follow the rules with macro lenses. Start adding a few inches and you get the expected benefit from the longer focal length. I'm usually not at minimum anyway, I like backing up for better depth of field.I love the 105, but I ended up not selling the 60. Sometimes the 105 is too long. Items on a table or a top view of a tall flower can be too close for the 105.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="nickt, post: 667884, member: 4923"] Things I have learned.... Working distance is from the front of lens to subject. But its sometimes hard to find this important number. Often what you get is minimum focus distance. This is from subject to focal plane. You need to do some math or googling to figure out the actual working distance. They don't make it easy, lol. Then there are some external focus lenses out there like the old Tamron 90. They get longer as you zoom. That adds more thinking to get from minimum focus distance to working distance. I have the Tamron 60 for a long time. Great (DX) lens but it doesn't get a lot of attention. I then picked up the Sigma 105 on a good rebate. At the very closest distance, I was not wowed by it vs the 60. But as I move back just a bit, I start to realize the longer focal length. My point is that at minimum 1:1 macro range, your focal length doesn't follow the rules with macro lenses. Start adding a few inches and you get the expected benefit from the longer focal length. I'm usually not at minimum anyway, I like backing up for better depth of field. I love the 105, but I ended up not selling the 60. Sometimes the 105 is too long. Items on a table or a top view of a tall flower can be too close for the 105. [/QUOTE]

Verification