Sigma 18-50 f2.8 MACRO

Sigma, I hate you.
I JUST bought my 18-50EX a month ago and now youre releasing
a 18-50EX MACRO???


http://www.sigma-photo.com …s.asp?id=3320&n​avigator=6

What do you think Of the Sigma 17 to 70. I have a Canon 17 to 55 and it terrable at it's widest focal length. I'm trying to exchange it from Canon. If they give me a refund I'm considering a Tamron or Sigma.
jbechdel@comcast.net

Yeah, I hear your frustration, but what can you do? Companies will continue to make new products and update their line up. Just go out and shoot more. If you can return it then maybe you should. But it'll be a few months before the new lens come out and it'll most likely be more expensive as well.
At least it's better than the kit lens you used to have.

I understand the difference between the Sigma 18-50 EX 2.8 and 18-50 EX 2.8 Macro is very minimal, Only a couple of inches closer focusing. I wouldn't lose sleep over it.

It appears to have different optics, hence it's a new lens. I hear the front element is bigger too. But I still wouldn't lose sleep over it.
:P

this is another reason I'm not too keen on buying 3rd party lenses - they come out with a new "version" all the time, thus reducing the value of the prevrious generation of the same lens that you've already bought.

Canon and Nikon do the same but they don't replace their lenses THAT often. How long has the 70-200 f2.8L been out? and the only major "upgrade" was the addition of IS, which is a WORTHY feature and warants an upgrade. Whereas Sigma CONSTANTLY comes out with a new version every year or 2. I.e. non-DG, DG, DG Macro.. etc.

Macro is a joke on ANY lens that is not a macro lens including any made by Canon. Technically every single lens out there has Macro on it, what is this? The ability to focus in on something close up. The ones that "don't" have macro mode on it are still about the same.

The only MACRO lens is an actual Macro lens and not a zoom lens with a macro feature.

cjm wrote in post #2059114
The only MACRO lens is an actual Macro lens and not a zoom lens with a macro feature.

oh darn, what about the mp-e 65mm?

I have the 17-70 & the macro side of it is great, ok it wont make up for a dedicated macro lens but just the other day I was out with my 350D & 17-70 taking some shots in the country, there were a patch of wild raspberries & I got a nice closeup, I certainly wouldnt have wanted to carry around a macro lens & change the lenses over just for that 1 shot! this is where the 17-70 with its ability to focus as close as touching the lens (almost) is unbeatable.

Nick

Agree with Nick - I've owned the sigma 1770 and the close focus ability is genuinely useful. Yes, no substitute for a dedicted (albeit expensive) macro prime, but excellent for using every now and then.

Tee Why wrote in post #2057967
At least it's better than the kit lens you used to have.

soo true. and yes they do depreciate but thats why I bought mine used:p.

Like with all things there is ALWAYS something better just around the corner, unless you have loads of money & upgrade everytime something new comes out your better off not to look once you have purchased something.

Nick