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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 17, 2004, 7:29 PM   #1
suz
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6
Default The same old question

At the risk of sounding redundant, I too am trying to figure out which lenses to buy along with my new 10D. I am a novice but have been producing some great shots with my non SLR digital camera. I like to shoot many different types of shots and there lies the delema. I want to be able to explore them all without breaking the bank

I love to take off the wall creative shots such as a close up of the raindrops underneath my patio table. So "Canon 100mm f2.8 macro"

I also live in the Sierra where landscape photography abounds. So I am also thinking "17-40mm f/4L usm ?

But then again I want have the capacity to get that all around shot with increased depth of field thus "70-200mm f/4L USM

Obviously I am not quite prepared for the expense of all three but am wondering in which of these areas that I should stick with the higher priced Canon and which areas might be more forgiving with a lesser priced Sigma??????????????????????? :roll:
suz is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 17, 2004, 7:49 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

I can't speak for Sigma as I don't own any, but Tamron 90mm macro is a fine lens as is the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di lens. I own the latter and have no complaints about it. On the other hand, I also own the Canon 100 f/2.8 macro and the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS and love both of them.

If you can't afford all three, you'll need to determine which type of photography you'll do the most of and go from there.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2004, 9:39 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

That canon Macro is very good. I don't own it, but all I've heard its a very good lens. If you can afford it, you should consider the USM version, its AF speed is orders of magnitude faster. Some say that AF speed in macro isn't worth it. What little I've found it is useful, but you need both AF and manual. AF gets you close, then manual fine tunes it (or just moving lighting forward or backwards.)

I have the 17-40 f4 and its a very good lens.

The 70-200 f4 is also quite good. I don't own it, but have heard good things.

The Sigma for the macro might be a good way to go. Their 105 is optically very good, but the AF speed is slow.

Sigma's 70-200 f2.8 HSM EX is very good, but I don't know if its more than the Canon f4 or not.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 12:06 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

Since you're asking the same old question, I'll give the same old answer! I use a Tamron 28-300 travel lens. Overall, it has yielded excellent results (see my link below). There seems to be a bias against this lens that I don't quite understand. I like not having to perform a lot of lens changes (I also carry the kit lens for wide angle and 50mm, 1.5 Canon lens for low light). There a few things to keep in mind when using this Tamron lens;

- It will get a little soft under low light at the wide angle end. It's imprtant to remember to use a wider open aperature and a slower shutter speed under these conditions

- However, the DRebel produces softer images than a point and shoot any way - all the images need to be sharpened in post production.

- Use a monopod for fully racked out zoom shots - this elimiantes/reduces camera shake nicely.


http://community.webshots.com/user/johnwmitchell100


I'd like to get another lens, and have my eye on a couple of Canon IS models. But then I think about having to haul extra lense around when I'm hiking and street walking and I can't bring myself to do it as long as I'm getting very good results from the Tamron 28-300! See for yourself. I hope this helps.
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 12:12 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
- However, the DRebel produces softer images than a point and shoot any way - all the images need to be sharpened in post production
Not exactly true. Improperly exposed and focuse pictures taken with the DRebel will be softer than the same picture taken with a P&S perhaps, but a properly exposed and focused shot requires very little, if any sharpening. Also, you can adjust the amount of sharpening you wish to apply when shooting jpg with the DRebel.
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 12:25 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 575
Default

For a walkaround lens on my 10D, I use the Sigma 24-135 f2.8-4.5
Some people have said that at 2.8 at 24mm the lens is soft, but I have not noticed, or maybe I am not as much of a perfectionist as some.
But overall for a $300 lens, I couldn't be happier! Especially with the little bit of extra wide the 24mm affords me.
I too have considered the 17-40, or 16-35, or the Sigma 12-24. In the end though, I have decided my camera bag is heavy enough for the moment (at ~16 lbs) and my wallet is empty enough! :lol:
Gandalf065 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2004, 2:38 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
iblaineman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 152
Default

I just purchased the TAMRON AF 28- 75/2.8 XR Di to use as my walk around lense. I realize I loose the wide angel. I thought I get the 50mm for portraits and heard it looks really good at f4 and f8. I thought it wasn't to expensive and seems to have quit good reviews. I thought having f2.8 through the entire range was nice and its not that big or heavy. I haven't really taken it out for pics yet. Hmm did I make a good choice?
iblaineman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2004, 8:26 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
"Not exactly true. Improperly exposed and focuse pictures taken with the DRebel will be softer than the same picture taken with a P&S perhaps, but a properly exposed and focused shot requires very little, if any sharpening. Also, you can adjust the amount of sharpening you wish to apply when shooting jpg with the DRebel."
I should have mentioned that I shoot in RAW format. mostly at proper exposure . I usually find that I can improve most shots with slight sharpening. Is there perhaps a setting in the DRebel that would help me avoid this step?
fporch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2004, 10:00 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 227
Default

Going back to the original question -

I'd scrimp on the macro - the sigma is rated very good optically and macro is an area that the slow AF isn't going to annoy you nearly as much. Besides this isn't going to be the lens you use most often. I don't know if the Canon goes to 1:1, the sigma I'm pretty sure does.

If I had to do it all over again I would have gotten the 70-200f4 instead of a 70-210f2.8. The weight of the latter is a detriment I find. But I do like the extra f-stop.

I'd get the Canon since this is going to be a lens you use a lot I'd guess.

At the wide end - consider going with a wide, fast prime lens if you're hitting the wall budget wise. Maybe a 20mmf1.8 from sigma, it's two and a half stops faster too. It was reviewed positively on photo.net and is cheaper than the wide zoom. I have the EF-S 18-55mm lens, so unless I win the lottery I'll never consider the 17-40. I'd never get the value out of it, based on my personal photo usage.

Don't get any lens that isn't full frame - the EF-S came in the kit and for the price it is excellent value.
ursa 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 2:56 PM.