|
What's the difference between a lens labeled "Macro" and one that isn't?
10 months ago
|
I've been looking for a fast, wide angle prime lens that will give me a normal focal length equivalent on my 60D. My choices seem limited to Canon's 28mm f/1.8 and Sigma's 30mm f/1.4. Both are a little long for my taste (I'd prefer something closer to a 35mm equivalent), but if those are my only choices, then those are my only choices.
However, I see that Sigma has a 24mm f/1.8 lens, but it's labeled "Macro." That fits my focal length need almost exactly (38mm EFL). My worry is the "Macro" label. I realize that this means that it's designed to focus close up, but does this somehow also limit its ability to focus at a distance, as well? I'd very much like this to be my walkaround street lens when I don't have my 15-85mm on, but if it's not great at focusing beyond macro distances then that makes it kinda useless for what I need.
This isn't the only one, of course. Canon has a range of macro primes that match the focal lengths of their other primes, but are slower and more expensive. I'm just wondering what's the difference between a non-macro prime and a macro prime, and if a macro prime can still be used for every day shooting.
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago | |||
| 10 months ago |