Need assistance to identify a Sigma Lens.

[Snooks]

I agree totally Tannin

- - - Updated - - -
@amerrat42

Looking at that page of images, top row 4th from the left with the url dyumx.com is the exact writing that is on mine. All writing regarding sizes etc is in the same spot and are identical

On the question of whether it has/has not got a filter, do this simple inspection:

Look at the front of the lens. The first actual lens element is the smaller glass about
half the diameter of the lens body. IF IT has got a larger flat glass surface at the very
front of the whole lens element then it is (most likely) a filter.

If it is a clear filter then AND you cannot easily remove it, then don't worry too much
about it, as it will probably have negligible effect on the IQ (Image Quality) that the
system is capable of.

Have a look at this page of images. The word "Macro" that appears "near the front" of
the lens body is actually engraved on the lens and refers to that much touted function
that it is supposed to sport.

As said above, it seems to be a capable enough lens. When you feel that its usage has
some limitations to your photographic needs then it will be time to look for some other
lenses as complements to this one.

- - - Updated - - -

PS: If you feel an overwhelming urge to go ahead and remove any such filter that may be
attached the lens, then perhaps take it to a "good old local" camera store, where they will
doubtless do it for nothing. - But beware of their suggesting you buy something you most
probably will not need

- - - Updated - - -

Good info from Ameerat in the post above, except that clear filters are highly variable. Some are fine and don't do very much harm. Cheap ones can be terrible. It all depends. There was something about the picture you posted that made my cheap-filter-radar go off. Might be a false alarm, of course.

The guy seemed to have some very expensive cameras because i googled them up and one was in the $6k range, but having said that, yes, it could be a 10c lens filter and poor quality, I cannot tell at this stage.

The photo is shocking because i took it in the mirror, then had to reverse it to read the writing and only really sharpened the image and didnt adjust the colours much at all, because that was not the intention. My point being it is probably more my taking of the photo than of the lens filter itself.

I've only actually taken 2-3 photos outside because in the week we've had it I didnt use it until Taylor was around because technically i bought it for her (lol) and then i have been so busy. I will see if i can upload an image in a second ad that may allow better judgement of the lens.

- - - Updated - - -

RoseBranch2small.JPG

This is the only image I have had the chance to capture so far. Simply a pruned rose and I was experimenting. Using GIMP i changed the hue a bit, and resized it but nothing else. Next step when i get a second is the same branch using Apeture priority and looking at the difference in the DOF in each image. Just a test to see if i understand DOF which I believe that i do. Until recently i thought DOF only applied to behind the focus point, not in front. So that was important for me to realize

The image was much larger and is stored in Nikon Image can't for the life of me work out how to link to here. I'll keep trying .