[Another dyemention]

Thinking bout getting this lens but had a few questions. Is 70mm long enough to get macro shots? Most of the pictures I've seen taken with this lens are the same as, say, the da 70ltd. Meaning they're not macro. And the ones that are macro shots, I'm unsure if they were cropped. But on that note, I never know if macro shots are cropped or taken with a teleconverter. The closest focus on the sigma is 10" so that doesn't seem too close. So just wondering. Thanks

[Adam]

The longer the focal length, the farther away you can be for 1:1 reproduction. 70mm is a good focal length to use on APS-C, in my opinion.

[stevebrot]

Thinking bout getting this lens but had a few questions. Is 70mm long enough to get macro shots? Most of the pictures I've seen taken with this lens are the same as, say, the da 70ltd. Meaning they're not macro. And the ones that are macro shots, I'm unsure if they were cropped. But on that note, I never know if macro shots are cropped or taken with a teleconverter. The closest focus on the sigma is 10" so that doesn't seem too close. So just wondering. Thanks

The Sigma 70mm is a macro lens and it goes 1:1. That should be macro enough for starting purposes.


Steve

[Kozlok]

The Sigma 70 is a real 1:1 macro. The DA35 and the DFA 100 are also 1:1 macros. They will all let you take photographs of the same magnification. There are two big differences focal length makes in macro. One, it affects how far you are from the subject at 1:1. You will be very close in any case. With the DA 35, at 1:1 your camera's sensor (not the end of the lens) will be 14cm from the subject, the Sigma 70 will be about 26cm, and the DFA 100 will be 30cm. Not a huge difference, but it can make a big difference for insects and such, and also has a big effect on lighting.

The second effect is the same as any other shot, the background will be compressed or stretched depending on focal length.

Here are some macro shots with my Sigma. None of these are cropped. The Bee isn't at 26cm, more like 40 or 50cm. The flower and cactus needles are pretty close to 26cm. Click on the photos for full sized images on Flickr.

[Another dyemention]

Thanks everyone. One more question. So if I wanted to take pictures of the flower pistils, or have a close up of the bee, I'd need more magnification I'm assuming? Like a tc. Or just crop.

---------- Post added 04-20-15 at 07:27 PM ----------

And nice pictures btw.

[calsan]

What 1:1 means is:
Imagine taking a photo of a flat object like a postage stamp. If the stamp is the exact same size as your sensor, then the lens will project the image of postage stamp exactly to the edges of sensor. i.e., the image and the subject are at a scale of 1:1. Obviously, then you view or print the image and the scale changes again, this time magnifying the stamp.

[vonBaloney]

The Sigma 70 macro is one of the sharpest lenses ever -- you definitely have some room to crop or use a teleconverter if you must as the resolution is outstanding. But you know, the more macro you get, the more demanding the technique needed (and equipment in terms of tripods, flashes, etc) to get good images. Shooting at 1:1 is plenty challenging enough if you are new to it without worrying yet how you are going to get even more magnification. In terms of performance, you can't go wrong with the Sigma, I've found nothing that can beat it -- it is a bit bulky though, loud screw-drive focus, clunky hood...

[Bruce Clark]

Thanks everyone. One more question. So if I wanted to take pictures of the flower pistils, or have a close up of the bee, I'd need more magnification I'm assuming? Like a tc. Or just crop.

---------- Post added 04-20-15 at 07:27 PM ----------

And nice pictures btw.

I have the Sigma 105mm Macro which is also a 1:1 magnification and has a minimum focus distance of about 12 in. I have no hesitation in cropping, if fact, depending on the subject, some cropping is essential in most cases to remove unwanted distractions. I have no experience in using a TC with this lens so I can not advise yo there. You could also use extension tubes to gain extra magnification. I occasionally use tubes with a 50mm lens again I have not tried it with the 105mm so I can't really advice on the outcomes there.

Good luck and looking forward to some pictures.

[esrandall]

I have the 105 Ex and the 50 EX DG -- both great lenses, and the 70 is supposed to be even better. You can't go wrong with any true macro lens, and the Sigma models are right there at the top. Good technique will allow serious cropping. You'll be having lots of fun

[Timd]

This was taken with the Sigma 70, cropped, hand-held. I think the dragonfly was drugged, because it did eventually fly away. It is more luck in my part getting focus hand-held, but is shows the ability of the lens.

[Another dyemention]

Ok cool. I was hoping I'd have the ability to crop that much if I wanted. And thanks for all the replies everyone. Sounds like that lens should work out for me just fine. Now I just gotta find some stuff to sell to fund it. Never ends

[BennyBoy]

Ok cool. I was hoping I'd have the ability to crop that much if I wanted. And thanks for all the replies everyone. Sounds like that lens should work out for me just fine. Now I just gotta find some stuff to sell to fund it. Never ends

You'll be able to crop more as your future cameras will have higher megapixels. I own the Sigma 70, 50. The Limited 35, 100WR. The 100WR maybe the sharpest, but the Sigma 70 is so close it's hard to tell.

My copy of the 70 front focus's, if I were to dial it in, it may get sharper then my 100WR. Here's some pics from the 70 macro.

[BennyBoy]

And this will show you the creamy out of focus @ 2.8/4/8.

[old4570]

The Sigma 17-70 is a very nice all rounder .. ( My K5 wears one )
If all you want is a single lens that can do everything reasonably well . then the Sigma has to be on the TO OWN list .
Though it would be hard to beat a dedicated Macro lens such as the Sigma 105 or Pentax 100mm ( For Macro )