I guess it's nice to be missed. Since my last post (that's probably about two years ago) I have been spending a lot of time on my studies, which has left very little time for posting here. Fortunately, it's paying off. If all goes according to plan, I'll have my Masters degree in 5 months time
I did travel quite a lot these last two years (I think I visited about 16 different countries, and can soon add 4 more to that list) and there are many shots I could post here. I'm going on vacation tomorrow to Croatia, but when I'm back I'll start a new thread with some of my latest travel photos.

To get back to topic, that 28-90 macro lens looks quite interesting. How close does it focus? Is it real macro (as in 1:1) or more like 1:2 (like many of the Sigma macro zooms)?

I still have 3 AI/AI-s lenses. I don't use them as much as I used to anymore. Most of my pictures now are taken while on vacation and more often than not I do not carry all my lenses with me anymore. Below are some thoughts about the lenses I have:

  • 135 f/2.8 series E: I still use that one from time to time. It's double the focal length of my standard zoom, but it's very light so I can take that one with me wherever I go. It's quite sharp (especially from f/4 onwards) and the bokeh is rather nice. Most of the Series E primes are quite cheap, so they may be a nice bargain.
  • Kiron 105 f/2.8: I got it for less than 100 euro at the time, so I guess I was lucky (the store that sold it for that price is now out of business). It's a great lens, no doubt about it, but $300+ dollar is a bit steep IMO for a lens that can neither autofocus nor meter. The lack of metering gets quite annoying if you're trying to fire the flash remotely or if the conditions change a lot. I don't know what brand new macro lenses cost in the US these days, but I bet 300 dollar will get you a long way towards such a lens.
  • Sigma 500 AI-s mirror lens: I picked this one up quite cheaply. I always wanted to try such a lens to see if it's really as bad as people say. I was pleasantly surprised by the sharpness of the lens (I expected much worse), but the contrast is rather poor (although that can partly be fixed in post processing). Also, I can only get sharp images from a tripod. It's effectively f/11, so it's quite hard to get a shutterspeed that allows for sharp handheld shots.

I'm going on vacation in a couple of hours. I'll post again when I'm back in about 3 weeks.