Sigma 105 macro & 28-200 compact

[hurry]

Two sample pictures made with 10D with these lenses, very light weighted and unexpensive.
I like them. It must not be a Canon :-)

http://album.digitalfotonetz.de/data/media/8/CAN105_640.jpg Sigma 105 Macro

http://album.digitalfotonetz.de/data/media/8/CAN28200_640.jpg Sigma 28-200 Compact

[CyberDyneSystems]

I had the 28-200 for a while and liked it just fine. It was the first lens I bought just so I would have a lens when my 10D arrived.

I took a lot of nice pics with it. Since then I purchased 3 more lenses,. all Sigma.
The 50-500mm,.
the 70-200mm f/2.8
and the 28-300mm.

I traded in the 28-200mm towards the cost of the 50-500mm at Ritz Camera. The others I got via internet.

I am entirely satisfied with all three,. but the 28mm-300mm is not quite as good as the 28mm-200mm. I should have known. But I don't mind the extra 100mm on my walking around lens. Though it is difficult to use, it is nice in a pinch.

[hurry]

A German photo magazine tested compact zooms: Sigma 28-200, Sigma 28-300 and Tamron 28-300.

Place one for Sigma 28-300, second place 28-200, third Tamron 28-300

Sigma 28-200 and Sigma 28-300 are available for nearly same price (difference 20 Euros), I bought the 28-200 because of the compactness. Tamron is more expensive and also not compact.

Sigma 28-200 ist an allround lens for every day.

Perhaps there are better lenses - for twice/threece/fource :-) the price


PS: I didn't take 50-500 because I am not a bodybuilder :----|

Sigma 28-200 380g
Sigma 50-500 1900 g oooouuuch!

[CyberDyneSystems]

hurry wrote:


PS: I didn't take 50-500 because I am not a bodybuilder :----|

Sigma 28-200 380g
Sigma 50-500 1900 g oooouuuch!


Hahaha! Well I am quickly becoming one!