Inexpensive third party Macro Camera lens

[-Deven-]

There are large number stuff I might purchase based on the catalog as well as the prices specified In the middle of the stuff within the list, 2 zoom lenses caught my concentration first and foremost for the reason that they encompass macro functions. They are:

• Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro
• Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Macro

However this is little expensive for me but I would like to choose one among it. Which of these is well again matched for macro? Other suggestions also helpful.

[Sharanya]

The cheapest way to macro shots (if you do not have suitable lenses for focusing at close range) with a compact camera. For the price of a good macro lens, you have cameras that fit easily into your pocket and perfect for close focusing. For SLR cameras, it may be worthwhile to get a close-up lens to look. A close-up lens is actually a filter (such as a polarizer) you in the front of your lens and screw that allows for closer focus. The disadvantage is that blur the edges may show up at open aperture and / or full zoom. Look differently at such a 50mm lens, which can often close focus and entry level is not that expensive.

Do you have a topic that quickly away (flies, butterflies, etc.) if you get too close, it is useful to a zoom lens to use, possibly with a teleconverter the magnification again by a factor of 1.4, 2.0 may increase. Again, the lens performance will rapidly diminish, especially if you go for the cheap alternative, faster and a tripod need enough sharpness in the photo.

[Amma-Watson]

Before wanting to have all the focal lengths of 10 to 500mm, it's nice to know what you want to do! Those with the Tamron 70-300 are very happy, and some say it's the best, while those with the sigma are very happy, and some say it's the best! The 18-200, a goal to do everything, I think is the goal that the user chooses not want to take the lead. The openings are not very generous and the quality may be a little less to go, but it is perfect for use "on a daily basis."

[Innocent User]

I do not recommend the Sigma. had the most time on (and I think it is still somewhere in my round) price and say must, for the is it ok, but just when you go over 100mm it brings no sharpness usable together anymore and the scattered light also interferes massively . You’ll have no joy with the results, especially when it comes to memorable photos eats it be a shame if the pictures are not really useful then.

[HKrish]

That's good advice, you have everything you need in the focal range zooms, do a lot of pictures to test all of this before thinking about change! And having in mind that you may have had the opportunity to buy excellent copies that would be a shame not to keep, must be tested, there are big differences!

[Ransom]

I am still inexperienced in the photo thing. I had a Fuji S2 Pro bought used and lack of money back then, bought the standard lens the Tamron 70-300. After I had put the D90 now, I could take over the lenses. So it is clear in any case, that approach does not come cheap, the Tamron to the Nikon lenses. But I must say that I'm using the Tamron lens, very happy and really surprised. To my mind, the AF is a bit slow. But I’m not actually in the zoom range nor had any direct comparison.

[Vance]

I had both lenses. The Tamron is processed valent, a tad sharper than the Sigma and is about 50 € cheaper. The advantage of the Sigma is the almost complete absence of chromatic aberrations. The CA's shows in all the Tamron lenses at maximum aperture, between 70-135mm, they are still grayed out three levels to see clearly. Since the lenses are optically differ little else, I sold the Tamron again. I prefer to take pictures, instead of by computer with the chromatic aberrations. With the Tamron, I recommend saving the images as a RAW file. With most RAW converters remove the CA is much easier with such as jpg's. The price-performance ratio is excellent for both lenses and makes a buy recommendation.

[Izna]

Between two lenses with same focal length, the same intensity and same make, significant differences in quality of life. If you know where to look, you can sometimes with cheap lenses from the feet.

[Muwafaq]

For general uses a 35 mm wide, the moderate and strong telephoto 85 mm and 200 mm telephoto lens quite strong a nice combination. You can find many disappointments and unnecessary costs avoided by wondering what exactly you want to photograph and which lenses are the most suitable.