Bought the Sigma APO 70-300mm Macro Super II

[justarius]

"X" is not that useful or descriptive for SLR lenses. I was using a prime lens, so technically it's 1x. The "35mm equivalent" focal length is 380mm.

Ah, I was actually asking you what's the resulting magnification factor you got and not the focal length, as you didn't mention what's the teleconvertor you used and I have no idea how many times magnification the B300 does. Sorry if the question is confusing...

Anyway, I fully agree with you that X is not a useful descriptive term for lenses at all (SLR or not). How the heck can anybody even know what a 10X lens does? A 2-20mm lens is 10X, so is a 50-500mm lens. I swear, the X branding is only used by manufacturers because X sounds cool, and also because people think the more X the better, so 20X confirm must be better than 2.85X of a 70-200mm f2.8...

 

[NiVleK]

Ah, I was actually asking you what's the resulting magnification factor you got and not the focal length, as you didn't mention what's the teleconvertor you used and I have no idea how many times magnification the B300 does. Sorry if the question is confusing...

Anyway, I fully agree with you that X is not a useful descriptive term for lenses at all (SLR or not). How the heck can anybody even know what a 10X lens does? A 2-20mm lens is 10X, so is a 50-500mm lens. I swear, the X branding is only used by manufacturers because X sounds cool, and also because people think the more X the better, so 20X confirm must be better than 2.85X of a 70-200mm f2.8...

Hmmm but to ppl who know their stuff... the more "X", the norm is that image quality suffers.

 

[NiVleK]

Oohh.. seems like i've found an alternative solution to my macro needs.. $300 is a good price to pay for both telephoto & marco purposes. i'm also using the D70 with kit lens. wonder if more sample pics can be posted so as to make comparison.. Thanks folks..

Shot with the above lens with 300D

 

[mpenza]

Ah, I was actually asking you what's the resulting magnification factor you got and not the focal length, as you didn't mention what's the teleconvertor you used and I have no idea how many times magnification the B300 does. Sorry if the question is confusing...

Anyway, I fully agree with you that X is not a useful descriptive term for lenses at all (SLR or not). How the heck can anybody even know what a 10X lens does? A 2-20mm lens is 10X, so is a 50-500mm lens. I swear, the X branding is only used by manufacturers because X sounds cool, and also because people think the more X the better, so 20X confirm must be better than 2.85X of a 70-200mm f2.8...

No prob. The B300 is 1.7x. For the shot I also used a Kenko Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter, plus 1.6 cropping factor of the digital slr, the 100mm macro lens has a resulting field of view as that of a 380mm lens.

 

[justarius]

No prob. The B300 is 1.7x. For the shot I also used a Kenko Pro 300 1.4x teleconverter, plus 1.6 cropping factor of the digital slr, the 100mm macro lens has a resulting field of view as that of a 380mm lens.

Wah...3.8X. Did you take the shot handheld? If so, good technique :thumbsup:

 

[mpenza]

yup, handheld at shutter speed of 1/200s. Thanks still needs improving though cos arms ached after the shoot.

 

[justarius]

Hmmm but to ppl who know their stuff... the more "X", the norm is that image quality suffers.

Which is why I said this is just a manufacturer's ploy to lure newbies. It isn't uncommon to hear newcomers to SLR's asking for lenses with 5X, 10X zooms, and complaining that their new camera doesn't have a big enough zoom range etc...

 

[imaginary_number]

Just bought this lens today for the Nikon D70 and must say that its a very good and inexpensive lens. Fast focussing and sharp pics, great for macro too. Bargain at $300 from TCW

Was it brand new?

 

[mpenza]

Just read a review of telephoto lenses in Practical Photography. The Sigma 70-300 Macro is rated the best among similar lenses from Nikon, Canon and Tamron. Tested to be sharp at all aperture and throughout the zoom range.

 

[smallaperture]

yup, handheld at shutter speed of 1/200s. Thanks still needs improving though cos arms ached after the shoot.

One suggestion - a monopod, something light, convenient to set up and bring around or go to the gym more often to train up the biceps. :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

Eversince I got my monopod, my Manfrotto 055 has been gathering dust at home. Maybe, I wanna to sell it away. Only need the 055 for night shots.

 

[strider]

One suggestion - a monopod, something light, convenient to set up and bring around or go to the gym more often to train up the biceps. :bsmilie: :bsmilie:

Eversince I got my monopod, my Manfrotto 055 has been gathering dust at home. Maybe, I wanna to sell it away. Only need the 055 for night shots.

Hi, any monopod to recomend? Are there those that need to buy separate heads?

 

[mpenza]

Manfrotto 679 is popular. I'm using the slightly more expensive slik pro pod 600 which is tall enough and not too heavy. Most monopods do not have heads.

 

[smallaperture]

Yeah, the Manfrotto 679B is what I am using. Depending on what you shoot, you may or may not need a head. If you shoot mostly with camera pointed horizontally, like in most landscapes, mount camera directly.

I stick a Manfrotto 700 head on the monopod. This is a Video pan and tilt head. I lock the panning, and use the tilt function only. The tilting is fluid - very, very smooth and no jerk at all and no need to lock the tilting when you shoot, as the viscous action prevents rapid rotational vibration, but allows slow tilting. Wonderful combo. For most people, a simple ballhead is most convenient and suitable.

 

[centrino]

SLIK PRO POD 600 cost about 85. any idea how much does the manfrotto 679B monopod and 700 head cost? thanks!