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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 2, 2006, 7:54 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
Default

What about the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS lens? How does it compare with Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC lens? I know Canon has a bigger zoom range and IS but I am more interested in knowing the overall quality of the lens performane (sharp, low CA, minimum fringing, etc).
harana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 2, 2006, 8:08 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 182
Default

harana wrote:
Quote:
What about the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS lens? How does it compare with Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC lens? I know Canon has a bigger zoom range and IS but I am more interested in knowing the overall quality of the lens performane (sharp, low CA, minimum fringing, etc).
IS only helps YOU stop shaking the camera so much. It doesn't help with action shots at all.

Meaning this: If someone is walking, or running, or some type of action and you can't or don't want to bumped up to a higher ISO setting and you can't stop them without a much blur, IS won't do ya any good.

17-85 is a better walkaround range, BUT... =o) The sigma woops it in most if not all areas including quality if you get a good copy.

I LOVE LOVE LOVE mine. Just got some prints back... great. =o)

-tlmiller10
Tim Miller Photography
http://tmillerphoto.com
tlmiller10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 10:55 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

harana wrote:
Quote:
What about the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM IS lens? How does it compare with Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC lens? I know Canon has a bigger zoom range and IS but I am more interested in knowing the overall quality of the lens performane (sharp, low CA, minimum fringing, etc).
FWIW, I sprung for this lens a month ago for the 20D, and I'm looking to resell it and get a sigma 24-70 2.8. For my purposes (indoorlow-light)I need a higher aperture with corresponding faster shutter speed...and then IS becomes less relevant.

I personally just don't find many instances where the 17-85 is the lens to use. That said, the shots I have taken with it have been sharp, detailed andcolor accurate. No ghosting whatsoever.

-UA
urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 12:10 PM   #14
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

urbanaries wrote:
Quote:
FWIW, I sprung for this lens a month ago for the 20D, and I'm looking to resell it and get a sigma 24-70 2.8. For my purposes (indoorlow-light)I need a higher aperture with corresponding faster shutter speed...and then IS becomes less relevant.

I personally just don't find many instances where the 17-85 is the lens to use. That said, the shots I have taken with it have been sharp, detailed andcolor accurate. No ghosting whatsoever.

-UA
urbanaries,

you may want to ask around. I have seen some complaints on another forum about the Sigma and it's focus speed especially in low-light. Part of the issue I believe is it doesn't have HSM. The comments I have seen are positive on image quality but low light focusing was an issue. I don't have the lens so I can't comment but it may be worth looking into. Not everyone with a 2.8 lens necessarily uses it in low light so some users may not be aware.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 12:59 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
Default

Thanks for good comment and information on the two lenses; Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM ISand Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC. Looks like Sigma is a better performing lens with lower price.:-)

What about purple fringing? One of the test review I read was complaining about Sigma having purple fringing and some of it was not removable in the PP :?
harana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 1:03 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 182
Default

harana wrote:
Quote:
Thanks for good comment and information on the two lenses; Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 USM ISand Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC. Looks like Sigma is a better performing lens with lower price.:-)

What about purple fringing? One of the test review I read was complaining about Sigma having purple fringing and some of it was not removable in the PP :?
Most lenses have Purple fringing...

If you want to get rid of it... and have great range, and quality. I gladly recommend you purchasea Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L lens, at the MSRP of 1,150.00 if I remember correctly. =o)

I opted out... and paid 355 used for my Sigma 18-50mm f2.8.

Btw... the Sigma doesn't focus perfectly in an almost dark environment, but that is usually not aproblem. I don't got cave spulunking much.

-tlmiller10
Tim Miller Photography
http://tmillerphoto.com
tlmiller10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 2:12 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 431
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
urbanaries,

you may want to ask around. I have seen some complaints on another forum about the Sigma and it's focus speed especially in low-light. Part of the issue I believe is it doesn't have HSM. The comments I have seen are positive on image quality but low light focusing was an issue. I don't have the lens so I can't comment but it may be worth looking into. Not everyone with a 2.8 lens necessarily uses it in low light so some users may not be aware.

I would start another thread but thismay/may notbe of interest to OP:

What about the Tamron 25-75 2.8? I just tried it in store on a 20D and it seemed to focusok in low light (not 'Dark'). I have never bought a3rd party lensso I am not sure what all I am compromising with Tamron vs. Sigma or Canon. I asked the salesman whatfunctionality/quality lossfromthe $550 Sigma and the $370 Tamron and he said "Nothing." I don't quite believe him!
urbanaries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 2:31 PM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Urbanaries,

My advice is to ask here and other forums for recommendations on these lenses under the same type of situations you will be using them. I have neither lens so I can't offer an opinion on this one. But, I will also point out that just because a lens works great for one person - if that person is doing completely different type of photography than you are, then you may have different results. When I seek gear advice I am always looking for people who use the gear in a similar way that I do. For instance, if I want a lens recommendation for birding - I generally consider responses from people who have actually used their lens for birding. Same is true for indoor sports. If I wanted to buy a 24-70 lens for indoor sports - it doesn't matter to me that it's a great portrait lens or works great for pictures of kids - I want to know if anyone's actually used it for taking sports pics. A specific example of the type of thing I'm talking about: The 85 1.2 (old version) is a highly regarded portrait lens - but it's focusing is too slow for sports use. The 85mm 1.8 at $1000 less money is a much better sports lens - even though it doesn't have as wide an aperture the faster focusing makes it a better tool for the job.

Also, by requesting recommendations for specific types of photography you may get responses for other lenses you haven't even considered yet. This forum and dpreview are both very good for getting responses back. The people here are a lot friendlier by and large but dpreview has a larger audience. So, I'll typically ask in both places.

As TMiller pointed out - almost any lens carries some drawback. The trick is to dig enough and find out if a given lens' problem area will be an issue for your type of shooting.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 6:07 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 238
Default

tlmiller10,

I am going to using this Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens for walk around pictures and for wedding photography. How is this for this kind of usage?

Also, can you really use it wide open with good results in low light situations?
harana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2006, 6:24 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 182
Default

harana wrote:
Quote:
tlmiller10,

I am going to using this Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 lens for walk around pictures and for wedding photography. How is this for this kind of usage?

Also, can you really use it wide open with good results in low light situations?
Well... I HAVE covered events with it, but no weddings yet. (Soon)

When used in combonation with a higher ISO setting (400 or above) it produces a nice DOF (it increases the more you go up with the ISO).

LONG story shot (I'm late for a date with my wife), It's a great little lens. The Canon clearly beats it, but for the price and the performance AT that price, it's a great low light lens.

It's not 100% accuarate in extreme low light. I'm talking like a a concert with stage lights but no lights on the audience, etc. It struggled there a bit, butI also was pushing to see what it could do.

Being so small and llight and having a different focul distance than a telephoto, you can always handhold a 18-50mm lens at about 1/15 of a shutterspeed. That's if no one is moving of course.

That's my opinion... and it's just that, MY opinion. I say buy the lens, if you don't like it, you can always resell it at Fredmiranda.com or return it (if you buy from a Brick and Mortor (REAL) store).

Good luck!!

-tlmiller10
Tim Miller Photography
http://tmillerphoto.com
tlmiller10 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 9:27 AM.