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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 28, 2004, 8:13 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 128
Default

Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO IF HSM vs. Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM orEF 200mm f/2.8L II USM

In the market for a telephoto and need some guidance.

Recently did some prtraits with my Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro Lens, liked
the result andthat's what got me looking at fixed lenses.....I know I will be doing the
zoomin' instead of the lens.

The price of the 135mm is as much as I want to spend.


Taken with EF 100mm f/2.8 USM, no editing just resized.







KeithT is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 28, 2004, 9:17 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Considering what you're shooting the EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM is the way to go... A prime is always better than any zoom:
http://emedia.leeward.hawaii.edu/fra...n_ef200usm.htm

The 135 f/2L is probably the better choice of the two, but you already have the 100
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2004, 4:54 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

I'm not that sure I agree with NHL here. In the old days, yes, a zoom was a poor quality substitute for a prime lens, and when you get right down to the (very) expensive primes then there is a difference if you know what you are looking for and at. Most of us do enlargements at up to A4 (some of us A3 with wide carriage printers) and you would be hard pressed to spot the difference. I use a 70/200 F2.8 and have no complaints at all with the quality, even when using the 1.4 adaptor.

For me the usefulness of the zoom is all important. There are times when you can't step back or forward and a zoom is a must, or else the picture is too big/small, or you missed something because you didn't have a wide enough angle.

Ideally of course the Canon 70/200, but I hear very good reports of the Sigma equivalent too, and have seen photos taken with it here which are breathtaking.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 29, 2004, 8:52 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

cameranserai

I champion the affordable Sigma in theses forums, and it's sharp: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...98&forum_id=37

However, there's a difference... even today: Try the 70-200 f/2.8 wide open (for the 'bokeh') and at minimum distances where most portraits are shot at. This is where all zooms regardless of brand will fall short of their purposedly designed primes and this difference is very noticeable when comparing side by side!

This is the old convenience vs utmost quality tradeoff
NHL 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 1:10 AM.