Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting ... I have the Nikon 17-55 but its close focusing is poor (IMHO of course). In fact, the 'kit' 18-55 is better for close focus than the more expensive lens.
This is my old buddy, Sony F828 at work, taken at 28mm (equivalent), f/2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaggy001
Interesting ... I have the Nikon 17-55 but its close focusing is poor (IMHO of course). In fact, the 'kit' 18-55 is better for close focus than the more expensive lens.
My Sony 16-50 f/2.8 does a fantastic job with close focus IMO, and also has a 1:4 magnification at that point. Here it is at work, wide open but at 50mm... which doesn't help add value to this thread (for being 75mm equivalent at this point):
I almost never used the 18-55 kit lens, and invested in this one ($600 at the time), just as soon as it was launched. It is a kit lens for A77.
Last edited by EinsteinsGhost; 05-20-2013 at 01:14 PM..
This is my old buddy, Sony F828 at work, taken at 28mm (equivalent), f/2:
My Sony 16-50 f/2.8 does a fantastic job with close focus IMO, and also has a 1:4 magnification at that point. Here it is at work, wide open but at 50mm... which doesn't help add value to this thread (for being 75mm equivalent at this point):
I almost never used the 18-55 kit lens, and invested in this one ($600 at the time), just as soon as it was launched. It is a kit lens for A77.
Wow! That pic of the rose is really sharp.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.