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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 16, 2003, 7:44 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 294
Default Ive narrowed it down to 3 lenses

Ok,

Ive been pondering for a week or so what my next lens is gonna be. Here are the one's that qualify in my book for my new addition in personal desired order.

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO HSM - $600-650.oo
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS - $900-1000.oo
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM $700-800.oo
"Prices are for NEW Item US auction listings"

I was also considering the following for my "Everyday General Shooting Lens"

Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Compact Aspherical Hyperzoom - $200.oo

I was just curious on what people's thoughts and feelings about these lenses. I wish to really not extend over $1000.oo for my new lens as of yet. But wish to venture into the L/EX series and see what that has to offer.

Now what I plan to use these lenses for is (Sports, Wildlife, and the occasional everyday photograph) But however, it will be 80%-85% Wildlife. I have also considered using a 1.4x or 2.0x converter even thought it would hurt my fstops, but with a f/2.8 that wouldnt be too bad.

Please give me the plus/minus of these lenses. Ive also found out and probably should have known already, that the wider the fstop the less DOF you get. So does that mean Ill get very little DOF with a 2.8 stop? Ack, I dont want that to happen...
UniSonBBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 16, 2003, 10:28 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS - $900-1000.oo
This is the non IS, with IS it is significantly more and for that price I'll rather go all the way for the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 EX APO IF HSM (Imagine what you can do with a 1.4x or 2.0x matched TC converter)!

Quote:
So does that mean Ill get very little DOF with a 2.8 stop? Ack, I dont want that to happen...
Shallow depht of field is good! That's what you pay extra for in dSLR. It helps pop the sharp focused subject from the blurry background... beside you can always get more DOF by closing the aperture down! You can't go the other way! ie when you need more light to compensate for the slow-shutter speed how do you open up the aperture? :P :P :P

... Also 28mm is no wide angle on the 10D/300D! you need at least 17mm for that wide perspective... (hint: about ~$300 difference for that Sigma EX 17-35mm f/2.8-4)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2003, 11:13 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 294
Default

Yeah sorry,

I just realized when you pointed it out. I just did a cut/paste from website really quick. Didnt see the IS in it... Yeah if I could get the IS for that... that would be really something.

I guess your trying to state though that you would choose the Canon 70-200 over the others? Can you let me know why? Im still leaning torwards the Sigma 70-200mm. Im not so much worried about the total focal length, however as you stated with the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 with a 2x :shock: That would just be insane. However the lens is out of my league right at the moment .

The only thing that is stopping me from getting the Sigma 50-500 is the weight. Unless someone like totally swears by it. I dont think Ill get that. And yes, I would like to keep everything all canon, but Ive noticed some other lenses seem to produce some nice stuff for less.

Leaning towards Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 still. More imput would be appreiciated. Thanks NHL
UniSonBBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2003, 11:17 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
I guess your trying to state though that you would choose the Canon 70-200 over the others?
Quite the contrary... I also happen to own the Sigma EX 70-200 f/2.8 HSM! What I meant was the ~$300 extra for the Canon's "L" would pay for that Sigma EX 17-35mm f/2.8-4... too

BTW the Sigma is also slighly lighter, unless of-course you prefer the heftyness (and white) of the Canon. :P I've made this chart a while back to help myself when I bought the 10D:




A picture taken with my Sigma EX 70-200 f/2.8 HSM is posted here.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 12:05 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 294
Default

:lol: :lol: 8)

ahhhh I see what ya saying now...
Well then so far its 2-0-0 right now Sigma 70-200 is leading...

Yeah I really need to get below that 28mm sometimes. Also what do you think about that Sigma 28-300 zoom. I thought it was very compact and stuff... price is really cheap... which usually in turn = cheap...

The only experience I have had with Sigma was at the store when I ploped on a Sigma 50-500 EX. Other then heavy :lol: It was very nice. Even in the dim store, great AF speed. Was impressed.
UniSonBBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 12:59 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

My thoughts:

IS is really really really nice to have. If it is worth it, that has to do with how much $$ you want to spend.

DOF is not the only reason to get a F2.8 tele lens. In fact, at 200mm at 11 yard distance, the DOF at F2.8 is 14 inches and at F4.0 it is 18 inches (roughly). See http://www.photozone.de/bindex3.html At 70mm it is 3 yards vs 4 yards. To me, the F2.8 means a chance at a shot at lower light, which is more important than the little extra DOF I gain.

Having Canon lenses with a Canon camera is nice. If there's something wrong with your setup, you can have Canon fix it (back or front focus issues, for example). I don't think they'll look at it if you send them a Sigma lens.... (or do they?)

The canon 70-200 is one of their best zooms made. Very sharp. Put a 1.4x TC on it and it is still a great lens. Even with a 2.0 TC people get very nice results. See http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...essage=6090755 for example.

If you're on a budget, the Sigma lenses you've listed are great, and cheaper.

Good luck with your choice!


Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 12:18 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Frank Doorhof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,320
Default

Hi,

I LOVE my 70-210 f2.8 APO from Sigma, if the 70-200 is as good you should buy that one without doubt, it will equal the L lens from canon in most situation.

For the longer reach I use a Sigma 135-400 f4.5-5.6 this one gave the best results on the web.

And for short reach I use the very cheap 28-105 f2.8-f4 APO from Sigma, this one will be replaced one day, but untill now I'm delighted with it's quality.

With Sigma you MUST know what to buy and than you can make SUPER deals, I'm now saving for the 105EX Macro lens from Sigma.

Greetings,
Frank
Frank Doorhof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 17, 2003, 11:30 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 294
Default

Well I made a move.

I really want that low fstop. But yet, I want it to be powerful zoom wise. I was debating on getting the Sigma 100-300 at f/4. But I wanna play with a f/2.8 for a bit...

I went with the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX APO HSM.
Ive also bidded on a 2x Sigma APO extender. Which in my book wouldnt be too bad shooting a 140-400mm with a f/5.6? Is that right? Then you can add on the 10D whatever it is 1.6x. I really dont consider it anymore cause Im not sure exactly its multiplying. Considering right now with what I have, I believe this is a considerable upgrade. Even though I am going to lose my IS feature. Thats what my tripod is for... If I cant handhold a 200mm f2.8 then I should give it up before I dig myself deeper :lol: 8)

Anywho, this is my upgrade:

Canon 75-300 IS USM f/4.5-5.6
to
Sigma EX 70-200 APO HSM f/2.8
Sigma 2x APO converter = 140-400 f/5.6

Plan to sell my 75-300 and my 2x convert I have now
and it should pay for a good chunk of it...
UniSonBBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 12:06 AM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

FYI

Just saw theses Sigma 50-500mm pictures on PBase today... (handheld too...)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 18, 2003, 12:25 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

For hand held (no IS) and 400ISO, those pictures are very nice.

What I'm lusting after right now is this monster:
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?o...ku=SG300800EOS

Something about having a lens which requires a handle to carry. Just makes you feel so... manly. Like a car with two mufflers. Of course, I'll be hiring an assistant to carry it. But seriously, I'd have to add about another $800-900USD to the price for the really good tripod, Wilberley and RRS QR plate. I won't be touching that for a year or more. But I can dream.... (imagine with the 1.6x... how far that will reach!)

Eric
eric s 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 9:35 PM.