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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 27, 2005, 11:27 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 87
Default

Hi, all. I'll be buying the XT once it's out (currently own an S1 IS). Question is this: what's the lense out there that is similar to what I have? I don't particularly care about the telephoto that much (the s1 is 38-380mm f2.8-3.5), and would like to have more of a wide angle coverage. So, I need something like 18-200mm and I see sigma just announced one just like that. HOWEVER, the max aperture on that is 3.5 which seems a little slow to me, right?

And that's the only lense I was able to find. What else is out there? I can't believe that this sigma is the first to hit that spot...

(budget, btw is around $usd 600)
coontie is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 27, 2005, 1:51 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Ewok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 142
Default

Since you're not restricted to just one lens, SLR lenses don't tend to be in the 10x zoom range. In general, the best pictures come from single focal length (ie prime, non-zoom) lenses. Followed by zooms that are around 3x, like 24-70, 70-200, etc.
Ewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 2:12 PM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

coontie wrote:
Quote:
So, I need something like 18-200mm and I see sigma just announced one just like that. HOWEVER, the max aperture on that is 3.5 which seems a little slow to me, right?
Correct!
However you forget with a dSLR you can boost up their ISO quite a bit over your current camera!

For example - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/143791


BTW the Canon 35-350mm and Sigma 50-500mm are also 10x zooms :lol: :-) :G
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 3:35 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Ewok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 142
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
BTW the Canon 35-350mm and Sigma 50-500mm are also 10x zooms :lol: :-) :G

I'm guessing coontie isn't quite ready for a 3 or 4 pound lens. :roll:
Ewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 4:06 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 87
Default

Ewok wrote:
Quote:
NHL wrote:
Quote:
BTW the Canon 35-350mm and Sigma 50-500mm are also 10x zooms :lol: :-) :G

I'm guessing coontie isn't quite ready for a 3 or 4 pound lens. :roll:
They weigh 3-4 pounds?!?!?! Are you joking? And how may I ask does one haul this around his neck?! That's insane. Ok. No, obviously what i need is something that's

-small
-takes sharp pics
-costs less than 500
-weighs very little
-total zoom no more than 4x (120-150mm?)

like somebody else pointed out, i can now go much higher on ISO, so ok, wide aperture is not important. I understand.
coontie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 4:09 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 87
Default

Ewok wrote:
Quote:
Since you're not restricted to just one lens, SLR lenses don't tend to be in the 10x zoom range. In general, the best pictures come from single focal length (ie prime, non-zoom) lenses. Followed by zooms that are around 3x, like 24-70, 70-200, etc.
I see. "Prime lenses" you say. OK. So, this 24-70mm sounds good. Any particular one?

smth like this?

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...61&navigator=2

coontie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 5:11 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Ponin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 139
Default

coontie wrote:
Quote:
Hi, all. I'll be buying the XT once it's out (currently own an S1 IS). Question is this: what's the lense out there that is similar to what I have? I don't particularly care about the telephoto that much (the s1 is 38-380mm f2.8-3.5), and would like to have more of a wide angle coverage. So, I need something like 18-200mm and I see sigma just announced one just like that. HOWEVER, the max aperture on that is 3.5 which seems a little slow to me, right?

And that's the only lense I was able to find. What else is out there? I can't believe that this sigma is the first to hit that spot...

(budget, btw is around $usd 600)
What kind of photos do you plan on taking? Landscapes? Portrait? Candid shots of people? Action?

f/3.5 may not actually be that slow depending on what type of subjects you will be photographing. (and it may be kinder to your budget)

Do consider that there is a 1.6x cropping factor when deciding on lenses for the XT. That is, multiply the focal length of the lens by 1.6
So to reach 18mm (lowest focal length you mentioned), you will need something like an 11mm lens and up. e.g. EF-S 10-22mm
But, you may benefit from a general lens EF-S 17-85mm (~27mm-136mm), which gives you some wide angle, and a fair amount of telephoto. These are good for doing some landscapes, some architecture, portraits, some sports/action, a good first-lens to consider.

Good choice on the XT. I am still stuck on whether to get the XT or the 20D.
Ponin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 5:44 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Ewok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 142
Default

You should be catching on at this point that there's a bit of a learning curve moving from point-and-shoot to dSLR. The sensor in a p&s is much smaller than that in a dSLR, which means the lenses in a p&s can be much smaller, and have higher zoom factors.
Ewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 5:47 PM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

coontie wrote:
Quote:
I see. "Prime lenses" you say. OK. So, this 24-70mm sounds good. Any particular one?

smth like this?

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/len...61&navigator=2
Here some test shots - http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/sigma_2470

... Again don't trust me or that person - Just go to the respective websites and check out their MTF's for yourself: the Sigma outperforms the Canon at 70mm while the Canon is better at 24mm - One can always spend three time more for the Canon brand if it makes one feels confortable, but I highly doubt if it's 3x better! :?

While it's also true one can use smaller aperture lens, what one 'sacrifices' though is the better 'bokeh' and the f/2.8 higher precision AF if the camera is a 20D or above...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2005, 6:10 PM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 87
Default

Quote:
But, you may benefit from a general lens EF-S 17-85mm (~27mm-136mm), which gives you some wide angle, and a fair amount of telephoto. These are good for doing some landscapes, some architecture, portraits, some sports/action, a good first-lens to consider.

Good choice on the XT. I am still stuck on whether to get the XT or the 20D.
Yea -- I wouldn't get the 20d. My friend bought one 2 days ago, I got to hold it and play around with it. Blah. One heavy mother, let me tell you (he got some other canon lens with it, forget which one.) Basically, he spent 500 on a metal body, 3200 iso, and 2 more focal points. Whooptie doo.

Now, I'll be mostly taking the kinda photos you mentioned. Architecture, landscape, family. Nothing fancy. I dont care for zoom at all, I had a 3x s30 for years and was quite satisfied with that. I've always wished for more wide angle, that is a fact though.

As far as that 17-85 lens you mentioned, I read about it. The consensus seems to be that it's way overpriced for ~600. I don't know if I'd want to spend that much for a glass that's not that much different from the kit lens mm-wise even if the pictures are way better. That's nice but I'm not Adams and it'd be hard to justify 600 for "better" quality pictures.
coontie 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 12:17 PM.