Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 23, 2006, 3:34 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 185
Default

i'm really looking at the sigma 24-135 2.8 for my rebel xt .anybody have one and what is your thoughts?
camerageak is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 25, 2006, 9:20 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 81
Default

I just looked up this lens at BH and it looks really nice for an all purpose lens. I would really like some imput on this lens also if someone has one.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation
Andrew LB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2006, 11:41 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Trique Daddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Default

I would be interested in info also. I am buying a 20D next month and am researching a walk around lens. If anyone has one or can fill us in on some details it would be appreciated.

Trique Daddi
Trique Daddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 27, 2006, 7:13 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

The Canon 17-85 is wider at the wide end which is more useful, but doesn't have the reach of the 135 and the tele end.

If I were buying a "walk around", 24 is nice but 17 is better.


Personally I'd be more concerned about the wide end for a walk around.
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 27, 2006, 11:17 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Trique Daddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Default

The 2.8 f-stop is what attracted my interest in the Sigma 24-135. Would the faster lens be more versatile than the 17-85? I am using the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 USM at work on my studio camera. I am purchasing that lens for my personal gear also. Of course it is used mostly for action and sports but I will shoot a good bit of that on my own also. I wonder if I will be frustrated with the higher f-stops. The kit lens 18-55 is wide but I am afraid it will be too short.

Thanks for the input. It is much appreciated and very helpful.

Trique Daddi
Trique Daddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2006, 7:34 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Depends which sport your shooting.

If your looking to use the lens for sports more so than as a walk around lens, then definitely the longer reach of the 135 will be helpful.

The F2.8 is helpful in low light situations, such as dawn/dusk or dimly lit indoor arenas and gymnasiums.

I use my 28-75 tamron F2.8 lens for a lot of sports. As long as I'm at least 15 feet away from the person (subject), it works well.

However I've also used my Canon 70-200 F4 lens indoors and managed to get good shots at ISO1600 and ISO3200.

-- TR

terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2006, 3:48 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 185
Default

terry you seem to be pretty sharp on this camera stuff . how does the sigma 24-135 compare to the tamron 28-75. i have the tamron and like it i would just like something a little longer .is the picture quality close at all .i'm just like everybody else.i'm looking for the perfect zoom lens to do everything and not break me.thanks for your help.
camerageak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 28, 2006, 6:44 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Trique Daddi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 282
Default

Thanks for the info Terry! I always benefit from reading your posts.I am interested in a 2.8 lens for the low light capability. I will have the Canon 70-200mm USM 2.8 so the focal length of the Sigma at 135 wasn't the draw. Your Suggestion on the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 will be very useful. I will compare price.You seem to use your equipment a lot so if you are satisfied with the quality it must be good. I will have the kit lens 18-55mm and really wanted something with a little more length in a 2.8.

Thanks for giving me something to think about! HAPPY SHOOTING!

Trique Daddi
Trique Daddi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 29, 2006, 11:34 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

I haven't use thesigma 24-135.

I looked on PBASE.com and saw that there far more users submitted photos with the 28-75 than the 24-235.

I've heard a few complaints that the 24-135 is soft. I looked at the images on PBASE.com and wasn't that amazed with them.

Maybe go out there yourself, and search for shots taken by the Tamron and Sigma and compare results for yourself.

-- Terry
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:24 PM.