Hey Jeff, I know more about macro/micro lenses than I
do about wide angle. However, I have used the Sigma
17-35 and liked it. (very little distortion around the
edges). As far as macro there are a few things to
consider. Magnification, and working distance are the
2 main things. Depth of field is also more limited at
higher magnifications.
In general the higher the magnification the smaller
the working distance (subject to lens dist) This can
be overcome by using a longer lens. That is why many
pros use 180mm macro lenses with insects.
Micro lenses have great magnification but the working
distance gets very small and is not practical for
insects but is fine for flowers etc. Also the depth of
field is very limited even at f/32 so you have to use
selective focusing.
Personally I use a Sigma 105mm EX and I love it for
the price. I used to have a Canon 100mm usm macro but
my ex took it when she moved out!
You can also use extension tubes with any lens to get
more magnification but at the expense of working
distance and light. Or you can use teleconverters to
increase working distance at the expense of optical
quality. I hope that helps, Todd
Email or post if you have any other questions!
--- snappy15656 <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am interested in checking out some new lenses for
> a eos cannon,I am
> interested in wide angle-macro n micro lenses.Could
> you give me your
> opinion on which ones would be best for nature
> photography,mostly
> shoot close ups and scenery.Sure would appreciate
> some feedback from
> someone who knows a little about these specialty
> lenses,thanks and
> hope I can help you sometime in return.
>
> Jeff
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com