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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 19, 2007, 8:14 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I have been away for a while doing Astronomy and have recently aquired another Canon 20-D.

My last line up was:

Tamron- 28-75 XR-Di 2.8

Sigma 150mm Micro 2.8

Sigma 100-300 f/4

Now that I haveanother 20-D, I would like to pick up another Tamron 28-75 and a Sigma 100-300.

But on the wide end, I am not sure what to get and works well.

And also, I am at a dead end trying to figure out weither to re-buy the Sigma 150mm Micro or get a Tamron/Sigma 180mm Micro.

When I did micro, I shot mainly insects and flowers. Of course the flowers dont move, but Dragonflies,flies,spiders etc. like to "run away".

Is there any compromises of the 180mm to the 150mm?

Who recommends a longer 180mm over the 150mm?

Any help at all on the wide angle and micro would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks guys.




arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 19, 2007, 8:57 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

Just out of curiosity, why would you buy the same lenses you already have?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 9:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I do not have any lenses right now. I sold my camera when I bought my $4000.00 telescope.

Astronomy is my night time passion, but I need a daytime hobby again and the P.S.

camera is just not doing it for me anymore.

I just bought the 20-D,battery grip,remote,420 EX Flash and a R.A. finder.

I am picking up my 28-75 Tamron tomorrow at a local camera shop.

But I need ideas on the micro and the wide angle.




arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 9:07 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

On a cropped camera the 150mm will do plus it's an f/2.8, the 180mm is f/3.5 and the focusing is slighly slower...

What about the new Tokina f/2.8 zoom for the wide?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 9:29 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

You refering to the 16-50 f/2.8 ?

I had been looking at the Tamron 17-50.

I had seen reports where it was as sharp as the 28-75......

if you get a good copy.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 19, 2007, 9:35 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I also noticed where the Tamron rated 9 and the Tokina rated 8

on Fred Miranda's website.

The Tokina only has one review that rated it a 8.

The Tamron has 71 reviews with a rating of 9.

arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 20, 2007, 7:39 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,544
Default

arowana wrote:
Quote:
The Tokina only has one review that rated it a 8.
That's quite normal - The Tokina was just barely released whereas the Tamron has been around quite a bit longer. The Tokina was derived from the Pentax where it was highly regarded and I believe it's also weather sealed.

IMO you can't go wrong with the Tamron either, I used to recommend that one as well
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2007, 11:39 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

O.K.

I have now recieved 3 of my 4 lenses I wanted for my 20-D.

The line-up is:

12-24mm Tokina

28-75mm Tamron

150mm Sigma Micro

Now, time for the Tele-photo. I have narrowed it down to two.

Sigma 50-500 or Sigma 100-300

The 50-500 weigh's 65 oz and has a f/ of 4/6.3. Cost from Sigma 4 Less is $899.00

The Sigma 100-300 weigh's in at 51oz with a constant f/4. Cost is $899.00

With the 100-300, I will want a 1.4x Tele to get the extra reach. This will add $155.00 to the cost of the 100-300 and stop it down to a 5.6. Also add 5oz to weight.

I will be using the zoomfor everything from birding to sports.

What would be the best option????

50-500/ f/4 to 6.3/ 65oz/ $899.00 or

100-300 + 1.4x tele/ f/4 to 5.6/ total weight56oz/ total price $1055.00

Thanks

Joey
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 3, 2007, 12:31 PM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

For sports the 100-300 is an outstanding lens - much much better IQ than the 50-500 due in part to 4.0 aperture. For wildlife, it's a little tougher. the 500 offers more reach. If it were sports only it would be a no-brainer, the 100-300 produces stunning results - the 50-500 good results but not stunning.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 4, 2007, 6:06 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I have decided to go with the 100-300 f/4 and a 1.4x Teleconverter.



Now, what is the difference between the DG and non DG versions?

I had the non DG version before I sold all my stuff and it worked great.

What does the DG version offer above the other??



Joey
arowana 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 11:44 AM.