File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Sigma MACRO 105mm F2.8 EX DG
or
Sigma MACRO 70mm F2.8 EX DG

What do you think? For general macro and close-up shots. I leaning toward 105mm, it's a bit cheaper and looks to be quite fantastic, couldn't find any decent review of 70mm.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2006:07:25 12:44:53Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height396
>> Anonymous
Dude, if you want substandard choices, go for the gold. Get the digital-only lens or the Sigma that'll start having problems in six to twelve months. I understand that my view isn't held by all, nor should it be, I suppose. It's just a product of necessity.
>> Anonymous
>>131696
That's off-topic.

It comes with 3 year warranty. I own one Sigma lens, no problems. Nikon 105mm costs 2x more (although it does have VR) and isn't better image quality wise.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
lol... I'm copypasta.

If you're cool with the quality of Sigmas, go for the Sigma. The 105 should give you a bit more working distance than the 70, so for bugs and such it's probably the superior offering.
>> Anonymous
hmm

i just checked B&H, both are at around the same price, 400$?

what gives?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>131761
Why not? They appear to be very similar in construction, 10 elements in 9 groups vs. 11 in 10, 62mm in diameter vs. 58mm, 9 blades vs. 8.

In the end I decided to go for the 70mm, because I already have a bunch of 62mm filters, also it's even better than 105mm, also 105mm x 1.5 is probably a bit too much for me, also EISA and TIPA says it's the best.