Couldn't say it better.
Nice shot :thumbup:

Be careful of what you wish for.
It's supposed to be autumn (Fall) here in NZ now but we haven't had any rain of note since about late November. New Zealand is apparently going through its worst drought since records began. Apart from the farmers and our economy being affected to the tune of a couple of billion dollars already, our lawn is dead!
We have watering restrictions for over half the country with neighbours being asked to inform on neighbours if they see anyone watering their garden or washing their car etc.
New Zealand normally has a very temperate climate with sun and rain in nice equal measures but not this year.
O how I wish it would rain. If I wanted sun all year I would go live in the desert.
An upside is that the Wine Industry is forecasting a fantastic grape season with a bumper crop due to be harvested.
Wonder if this is god telling me to save water and drink more wine?
(Read in this mornings newspaper that no significant rain is forecast for at least another 10 days!)
Cheers

I have owned this lens, the ED version, for many years and agree it is a fantastic piece of work and produces beautiful results. (Lovely out of focus backgrounds at f2.8).
A note of caution though.
It won't auto focus on older smaller cameras.
It is HEAVY! Weighs over a kilogram and not a walk around lens unless
you are used to carrying this sort of weight.
Didn't balance well for me on my D200. Is great though on the D300s.
If using on a DX camera, at the long zoom end recommend a solid tripod.
Cheers

Australasian?
Hmmm.
Absoloodylutely fantastic!
Bet you that will become numba won on Alice Radio.

Thanks Geff. Good info on true Macro.
No, way way out of warranty. Had it for years.
But will pursue a repair here locally maybe just not through Sigma.
Cheers

Thanks for that.
I wrote EXDG as that is the way it's printed on the lens but now you mention it, there could be a very tiny space.
See what you mean about sales on eBay.
Like you, when I googled EXDG got no hits but now I have tried EX DG get 1000's. will spend a little time seeing if anyone else has reported a similar problem. Mine is about 10 years old and in mint condition apart from the problem, takes a nice photo so I think, in view of the 2nd hand prices, I will pursue a repair, somehow.
Thanks again.
Cheers

Thanks for the picture of Petra Dave.
Brought back memories of many years ago riding down that valley on horses to that exact spot you photographed. They took the horses away then and we walked miles further along the old road.
One of the vendors on the side of the road we met turned out to be from New Zealand!
Some years earlier she had been a tourist, like us, and met a local chap who invited her to stay with him. Illegally she did so, fell in love and some years later she was still there.
She took us to her home (one of the caves on the right, going up the valley) and showed us the very simple life she had adopted.
Fascinating!
When we got home we Googled her and found they had made a documentary film of her life there.
So thanks for the memory jogger.
Enjoy this site. It's very interesting and informative at times.

Welcome from New Zealand Brent.
Retirement is the reward after a life of working but
I sometimes wonder how I ever had the time to work.
Cheers

Nice pic.
Welcome from New Zealand.

Thanks for the advice. Have posted on the General forum but you may have answered something for me as well.
Interestingly, It doesn't have MACRO on the lens itself. It has macro on the box and on the headings on the paperwork and instructions though. And the serial number on the sticker on the box agrees with the serial number on the lens. But no MACRO on the lens itself.

This was my first and last sigma and purchased when I had a bit more money than I have now. Being retired I am now going through a lot of old gear and trying to resurrect some of it to use again.
Thanks for your help.
Cheers

Ouch! Sorry to hear of your problems too.
This was a very pricey bit of glass here in NZ when I bought it some years ago. Am retired now and don't have the money to spend on equipment that I had when I was working. Hence my digging this out again. It still takes a lovely photo but if I point it down I can't 'wind' the zoom in and point it up and I can't wind it out.
Holding it level, I can work it in and out but with that dead spot in the middle sort of puffing air.
It's the only non Nikon lens I own and while I wouldn't like to sell it to anyone as it is, it is frustrating having it sit in the closet as well.
A dilemma!
When I think about it, this may have been a silly post as I guess the only decision is do I spend about $200 sending it off for sigma appraisal, then find it may cost another $xxx to repair or do I just use it as a book case ornament.

Thanks for your reply, appreciated.

Mate. I didnt have ANY money. 50 years ago I was apprenticed to a photographer and got paid, from memory about 10 pounds a week to carry his gear, set up lights and spend hours in the darkroom 'processing'. This included mixing the chemicals, putting rolls of film from the cartridges into the developing cassettes, washing the prints in stop and fixer. All in a very dreary red light inundated with a smell that even today brings back some not always happy memories. Being severely chastised if I left anything too long or too short. Eventually, after about 2 years I was allowed to play with the ENLARGER. What a grounding. Looking back I wonder how I stuck with it but my mentor/employer/slave driver was a perfectionist and demanded perfection from little keen fellows like me. He's dead now but was a great grounding in the discipline of photography, as it was then. Everything cost and of course if I stuffed up the developing, he couldn't go back and reshoot. Eventually he decided I knew enough of the processing and I became an assistant photographer and one day he gave me the gear and sent me out on my own. That took probably over 2 years for that day to come. In the meantime I had spent a lot of time watching and helping in the studio of course. (mostly unpaid as a lot of it was weekend weddings and evening portrait work).
So no, I dont come from a privileged background, regrettably.

The difference between Lightroom and Photoshop is immense. Lightroom has few manipulation tools. It is as close as the 'old' darkroom in its limitations. Another good feature is it never alters the original file. Creates a file only of the changes and applies those as and when you open the original. It really is a quite different programme.

Your final comment supports my case.

Cheers

Thanks for the suggestion. Its a twist operation. Cheers

Yes, and everything you say is true, but it is no longer fair or correct to call the manipulated result Photography.
It's digital manipulation.
If you had worked in a 'dark' Darkroom for as many hours (years), as I did, you would know the difference.
And everything we did back then was created without any input from any anonymous programmer. Yes the final result was created by the technology of the day but the camera didn't lie. Maybe we enhanced later in the darkroom but the initial negative was true and the later enhancement was added solely by the effort and artistic ability of the photographer. Without out any anonymous help from a computer.

Dont get me wrong. I am not criticising Digital Photography. I love it. (well love may be too strong a word). But I don't kid myself that I am still practicing photography. You wield a portable computer when you point your 'camera' at the subject. And largely the result is determined by the camera manufacturer, his software and finally, Adobe or its ilk.

Personally, for my own satisfaction I shun Photoshop and limit my creative darkroom skills to only what is offered by Lightroom. Not excactly a purist but as close as I can get while achieving a modicum of satisfaction from my modern equipment.

SIGMA 2.8 24-70 EXDG.
Have owned this lens for a few years and forgot why I put it away, but 'found' it again yesterday, put it on a camera and !@!#!*!

It has a sort of dead spot in the zoom which makes it rather difficult to use.
Almost like it fills up with air then puffs the air out when it goes past the 'dead' spot.
I seem to recall contacting SIGMA NZ who quoted heaps just to even look at it, so put it away and forgot about it.

Hard to explain exactly the problem but anyone with this lens and a similar problem will know what I am talking about.
If you had the problem, was there an easy fix?
(Have posted this on the Macro forum as well as it is a Macro lense)