need help deciding..

S

Slipperman

Senior Member
.. between 2 Sigma lenses. both of these look similar in their functionality and cost about the same on sale but there is a big difference in the original list price. i would like this to be a multi-use lens for mostly landscapes and macros and even though both imply they can do close-up photography, one has MACRO right in the name (the other doesn't) and both have differing specs in regards to close-up photography e.g. minimum focusing distance and maximum magnification ratio. could someone who understands more about such specs help me out? here are the links to the 2 lenses..

Sigma 1

Sigma 2

i'd rather get the more expensive one since it has a lower sales price (and is more expensive) but it's the other one that specifically has MACRO in the title.
 
Last edited:
S

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I don't know that either of these lenses are what you want. For landscapes, you typically use a wide angle lens (which you have in your 18-55) and for macro, you want 1:1 magnification (which the Sigma macro doesn't have). These are cheap alternatives to Nikon's 18-200 lens, which is an all-purpose super-zoom. A nice lens if you want to be able to go from wide to tele without changing lenses.
 
N

nickt

Senior Member
I don't have any first hand experience with this lens, but the macro is the newer and supposedly improved version on this lens. I have not read any reviews. Smaller filter size too and lighter.

Are you sure you really want a super zoom? They have their place. My Tamron 18-270's place is mostly on the shelf, lol.
 
S

skene

Senior Member
It would probably be best to rent the lens, or try them out at your local camera specialty shop.
While I am sure you would think that it would be a nice thing to have, unless you really end up finding yourself to need going past the +50-300 range...
I rarely find myself going to a zoom lens for any photos. I keep 90% of it under 50mm, and rarely do I end up using zoom lenses.
Try just picking up a cheaper zoom like a 55-200, 70-300 and decide on if it's really a lens for you.

Worst case scenario, it's not something you like... and easily resell.
 
S

Slipperman

Senior Member
first off my 18-55mm sucks. very inconsistent quality and i can't get the background to blur enough to save my life. in photo after photo the background doesn't even look blurred when viewed at normal size (or sometimes does which is worse) but is always blurred to some degree when viewed at 100%. so 2 problems - when i want sharpness through the entire pic i don't get it, when i want a lot more blur in the background, i only get a little. i know there's a connection between focal length of a lens and the depth of field but i'm still having a problem understanding it. i figured a larger zoom range might give me the ability to blur the background more on a low aperture # and also get the sharpness i want with a higher number.
and just to further explain where i'm coming from, i figure in addition to the zoom i would like to eventually get a wide angle (10-24) and 50mm 1.8 prime for portraits.

skene said:
It would probably be best to rent the lens, or try them out at your local camera specialty shop.
While I am sure you would think that it would be a nice thing to have, unless you really end up finding yourself to need going past the +50-300 range...
I rarely find myself going to a zoom lens for any photos. I keep 90% of it under 50mm, and rarely do I end up using zoom lenses.
Try just picking up a cheaper zoom like a 55-200, 70-300 and decide on if it's really a lens for you.

Worst case scenario, it's not something you like... and easily resell.
Click to expand...
may i ask what type of photography you do the most that doesn't require anything more than 55mm?
 
B

Bill16

Senior Member
You should check HERE for some help with what your having trouble with. Jack posted a pretty easy to use info on dof and focusing distance! :)

PS. I would get the 105mm micro lens for macro shots. :)
Slipperman said:
first off my 18-55mm sucks. very inconsistent quality and i can't get the background to blur enough to save my life. in photo after photo the background doesn't even look blurred when viewed at normal size (or sometimes does which is worse) but is always blurred to some degree when viewed at 100%. so 2 problems - when i want sharpness through the entire pic i don't get it, when i want a lot more blur in the background, i only get a little. i know there's a connection between focal length of a lens and the depth of field but i'm still having a problem understanding it. i figured a larger zoom range might give me the ability to blur the background more on a low aperture # and also get the sharpness i want with a higher number.
and just to further explain where i'm coming from, i figure in addition to the zoom i would like to eventually get a wide angle (10-24) and 50mm 1.8 prime for portraits.

may i ask what type of photography you do the most that doesn't require anything more than 55mm?
Click to expand...
 
S

skene

Senior Member
Well you have to first know what you are doing to try and get the shallow DOF (depth of field). So tell us really what you enjoy taking pictures of, and what modes do you shoot at. If you are constantly shooting on "Auto" mode, the likelihood that you will get what you are looking for is unlikely. You want to be able to adjust for what you need.

BTW, the 18-55 while it is just a kit lens is also a semi-decent lens for producing that blur (bokeh) that you want so much. If you want a bit more bokeh in your shot, maybe you may want to invest into the 35 or 50mm 1.8g. At wide open it will give you exactly what you want, but if you are shooting on auto it still may not give you what you want. Just sayin'.

If you need to ask and are curious to know, most of the photography that I do is macro and street photography.
 
A

aroy

Senior Member
If you read the specs carefully then

1. Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF is normal lens (FX)
2. Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM is a macro lense for DX sensors (DX)

So if you do not need the macro capability and/or you have an FX camera then the second lense is what you need.
 
J

Jezzce

Senior Member
aroy said:
If you read the specs carefully then

1. Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF is normal lens (FX)
2. Sigma 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM is a macro lense for DX sensors (DX)

So if you do not need the macro capability and/or you have an FX camera then the second lense is what you need.
Click to expand...
According to Sigma Photo web site (18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM | Sigma), a DC lens is APS-C size sensor compatible. Although you can, also use it on a FX camera cropped.
 
Top