Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 27, 2006, 10:58 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Mountain Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 355
Default

I really need help here guys on 2 things

1) I want to get a macro lens for my km7d before I go away on a trip in 7 weeks. How does the Sigma 50 f2.8 macro go. It has a 1:1 take and other than that I have little knowledge in this area. Suggestions please. What is the difference between my standard 35-70 mm tamron and a 50mm macro when you still seem to only get within 7 inches according to the specs on the Macro???? Help please!!

http://www.sigma-photo.com/lenses/le...sp?navigator=5

2) I have been told that the Bigma(Sigma) 50 - 500 mm lens is the go for what I need. Any comments here would be appreciated and I will be using it mainly for bird photography.

Help !!! Pretty please!! :sad:

Mountain Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 28, 2006, 3:55 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Nagasaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
Default

What the macro lens does is allow you to get extremely close to the subject. The 50:500 lens is 1:5.2 which means that your smallest subject must be 5 times the size of the sensor. With 1:1 the subject and sensor can be the same size.

I use the Sigma 50mm on a Nikon D70 and I'm pleased with the results, sample attached.

The lens is capable of focusing out to infinity so it also makes a good general purpose lens.

However for bird photography you are more likely to be shooting from a distance so a telephoto lens or telephoto zoom is probably more useful.

I can't comment on the 50-500 zoom lens although fixed focal length lenses or zooms with a shorter range do tend to give better results. It tends to be a trade off between convienience and quality. That is not to say that the 50-500 zoom will not give perfectly acceptable results.



Ken
Attached Images
 
Nagasaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 4:52 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Mountain Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 355
Default

Thank you so very much for helping me with something that I know very little about in the ways of macro.

Can you recommend a macro lens and specs for me to work with?
Mountain Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 5:30 AM   #4
Moderator
 
Nagasaki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 897
Default

It depends very much on what you want to photograph. For macro you are ideally looking for a 1:1 reproduction ratio. I own 2 macro lenses the Sigma 50mm which is 1:1 and a Tokina 100mm which only goes to 1:2 so my subjects with this lens have to be twice as big as the sensor. My reason for choosing the Tokina lens was that I use my camera underwater and this lens fitted into the same port as the Sigma 50mm. For me that was sufficient advantage to outweigh the lesser magnification. My avatar was shot with this lens. Tokina now make a 100mm 1:1 lens.

Sigma also make a 105mm macro lens and Tamron make a 90mm macro boththese lensesstill give 1:1 reproduction but with a greater working distance. The advantage is that you can take pictures of skittish creatures from further away. Not sure about the downsides although it may be harder to focus. For me underwater I use the 100mm in good conditions and the 50mm in poorer conditions to cut down the amount of water between the camera and the subject.

I see that KM also make macro lenses but I cannot determine the magnification from the KM website. On their macro zoom lens I can't work out the focal length either.

Not sure how much this information helps. I can say I am happy with the results from the Sigma 50mm and the Tokina 100mm and would buy from either again as long as it was the same pro range (Sigma EX and Tokina AT-X).
Nagasaki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 6:54 AM   #5
Member
 
Thaipo Negative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37
Default

A macro lens is used for taking close up photographs of small objects like insects and flowers etc. The difference between it and your 35-70, is the magnification. While they will still focus at the same distance, the image produced by the macro will be larger. It is 1:1 while your 35-70 may be 1:5 so the macro image will be 5 times larger. Macro is about magnifying small objects at very close distances, it wont magnify something hundreds of metres away, so is useless for bird photography.

An alternative to the 50-500 is the 170-500. With the 50-500 you are paying for the extra range rather than extra quality.

http://www.sigma4less.com/sess/utn;j...amp;Submit.y=6
Thaipo Negative is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 7:37 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Mountain Hawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 355
Default

Ok.I think that i am starting to realise where I was getting confused. Thanks heaps guys and I can see what you mean about the 50-500mm. 170-500mm might very well be the go.

As far as the macro goes it will also be a question of what macros they have available for minolta mounts but a 50mm sounds fine.

Thank you both so very much for taking the time to help me here and It is very, very much appreciated.

Thanks guys

Mtn
Mountain Hawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:05 AM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Thaipo Negative wrote:
Quote:
An alternative to the 50-500 is the 170-500. With the 50-500 you are paying for the extra range rather than extra quality.
Perhaps. But, I know of one thread right now where a KM DSLR owner is complaining about soft photos from the 170-500mm. I have not seen any threads complaining about the 50-500mm. Of course, it could be user error (although shutter speeds look fast enough), or an out of calibration body (AF sensor alignment).

Also, the 170-500mm has an overall optical rating of "Poor" (1.93) in the User Performance Surveys at http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html (with users calling it's performance as Poor on the long end wide open, and only OK stopped down).

The 50-500mm has a better rating of Average (2.73), with it's performance on the wide and long end rated as OK wide open and Good stopped down. The 50-500mm is also an EX lens (Sigma's higher quality lens line).

Keep in mind that these are only user opinions

Go to the bottom of this page, and select Minolta AF from the choices under User Performance Surveys.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

On the page it goes to, press the Start Query button you'll find under the heading titled Browsing the Lens Database, and you'll see all lenses reported on in Minolta AF mount listed if you don't change the default parameters.

Another good source is http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html (

Select a lens manufacturer to see how a lens is rated, based on MTF charts versus user opinons. Some lenses may be listed one place but not another.

The user reviews at http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/results.asp?IDLensType=3 (link to zoom lenses) is another place to get opinions for lenses for KM DSLR models (but read the reviews versus going by the ratings, keeping in mind that these are opinions versus tests).

As for macros, sometimes a longer lens is preferred for more working range.

When shooting closeups, if you have a 50mm lens with 1:1 Macro ability, and a 100mm lens with 1:1 Macro ability, they will both be able to fill the frame with a subject the size of the sensor or film.

But, with the longer lens (for example, 100mm vs. 50mm), you can fill the frame with the same size subject from twice as far away. That can come in handy so that you don't spook closer subjects, and it can work out better for lighting (so that you don't have to worry about casting shadows as much).

Some popular Macro lenses include the Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Macro (the newer version is a 1:1 Macro lens). The Minolta 100mm f/2.8 Macro is also superb by all accounts (and photos I've seen from it are super with great bokeh).

Sigma makes a 105mm f/2.8 Macro that's well liked (as is their 50mm f/2.8 Macro). The Minolta 50mm f/2.8 would be another 50mm choice that's an outstanding lens by all accounts.

Personally, I'd go for the longer lens and let it double as a portrait lens, too (although AF will be slower with a Macro lens).

On the budget end, you can sometimes find a Vivitar 100mm f/3.5 Macro at a good price. Users seem to think it's good for the money. It's a 1:2 Macro without an included adapter, or 1:1 Macro with the adapter. Some of the older Tamron 90mm Macro lenses were also this way (required an adapter to get 1:1).

You can see some user opinions of Macro Lenses on a site specific to KM DSLR models here:

http://dyxum.com/lenses/results.asp?IDLensType=2

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:14 AM   #8
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

I have the Sigma 3.6/180 and can tell your right off the bat, a fantastic lens for macro, but a bit short for birds...

I also have the 50-500 and the quality is superb. It's around $800, less then half the price of comparable lenses - BUT - and a very important but - I cannot handle this lens hand-held at maximum zoom. At full 500, it's 13 inches long and quite heavy - You will need a monopode.



Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:16 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
bernabeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 990
Default

Minolta Maxxum 35-70mm f4 macro (used about $70)

shot taken at about 20"

Last edited by bernabeu; Jun 27, 2015 at 5:24 PM.
bernabeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 28, 2006, 10:30 AM   #10
Member
 
Thaipo Negative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37
Default

Yes you are right, its been a while, the 50-500mm is an EX so its going to be better quality than the 170-500mm. I have seen some complaints about the previous model of the 170-500mm.
It seems that he doesnt quite get what a macro is for since he is asking about it in relation to birds, which macro is the last thing you want unless the birds are stuffed.
Thaipo Negative is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:04 AM.