JRd1st's avatar
Well, Sigma lenses are a little cheaper than Nikon or Canon lenses. The Sigma 105mm macro is nice because you can stay about a foot away from the subject. That's what I have for my Nikon and what I will probably get for my Canon. Or maybe I'll just use my Nikon for macros since I have the macro flash setup.

Argh, photo equipment is so expensive. But it's unwise to buy cheap because you always wind up wishing you hadn't. But the Sigma Macros have given me good performance.
NoraBlansett's avatar
Yeah, they've been recommended to me. I'm seriously considering trying one, too. I'd really like a portrait and macro lens. I have a great one for architecture (which is a favourite of mine) but I would really like a nice wide-angle lens for landscapes.

Basically, if I ever won the lottery, I could easily spend a fortune just on lenses. XD
JRd1st's avatar
In my opinion, the 105 macro is more useful than a wide lens. I have a sigma wide and hardly ever use it.

What camera do you have?
NoraBlansett's avatar
It's a Canon Rebel XTi... Not the fanciest, but it gets the job done. LOL
JRd1st's avatar
That's a good camera. It's the EOS 400D with a different name. I see a lot of awesome shots on dA taken with that model. :nod:
NoraBlansett's avatar
For the most part I'm really happy with it -- but when I do shoots with other photographers I suffer from severe camera envy. I'm very fortunate that I am one of the primary photographers for the Royal Nova Scotia International Tattoo -- but I'm the photographer with the weeniest camera. LOL I'm doing professional jobs yet I know the other photographers look down their nose at me. My only consolation is that I manage to do the same job as them with my weenie camera. *snicker*
JRd1st's avatar
I'm not sure that they're really looking down their nose at you, but always remember that you create beauty with no camera at all. AND you're a nice person. :iconspazhugplz: