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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 6, 2005, 10:10 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
KM_krazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
Default

I am looking at getting the XT, and I was looking at getting both the Sigma AF 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC, and the
Sigma Zoom Telephoto 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO. That would then cover me everywhere from 18-400mm(=to 29-640mm), with two lenses
I was just wondering if anyone out there has any experience with either of these lenses, or has any other recommendations for a good combo.I would like to pay under $1000 :roll:. I will be taking everything from wide angle to wildlife shots, so I need something with a good top zoom, as well as wide angle.
Thanks!!
KM_krazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 7, 2005, 12:25 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

The 135-400 has a very nice MTF chart, not very fast but looks like a pretty decent lens for the price. ($540)

However that's probably not the lens that will be on your camera most of the time.

If I were you I'd spend just a little extra to get the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It's $500 v $269 for the 18-125 but it's a much better lens by the look of their MTF charts, also the Canon has IS.

Chances are you will be taking most of your photos with the standard zoom, so I'd try to spend a little extra there to get better quality.

That's $500 + $540 = $1040 which is pretty close to your limit.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2005, 3:13 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
KM_krazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
The 135-400 has a very nice MTF chart, not very fast but looks like a pretty decent lens for the price. ($540)

However that's probably not the lens that will be on your camera most of the time.

If I were you I'd spend just a little extra to get the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It's $500 v $269 for the 18-125 but it's a much better lens by the look of their MTF charts, also the Canon has IS.

Chances are you will be taking most of your photos with the standard zoom, so I'd try to spend a little extra there to get better quality.

That's $500 + $540 = $1040 which is pretty close to your limit.
As far as the 135-400 goes, ya, its not the fastest, but I can just boost the ISO a little and it should do fine :G
For the Canon 17-85. . .Do you think I will miss the gap between 85mm and 135mm? Thats 50mm where I won't have a lens. . .
Also, how much do you think that I will use IS? I have used my DiMAGE 7Hi with a 28-200mm lens, and I have had no problems without IS. Is it worth paying 300 bucks MORE for the Canon 17-85 over the Sigma 18-125, just to get IS, and slightly better quality?
Thanks for the help!
KM_krazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2005, 5:25 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

KM_krazy wrote:
Quote:
peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
The 135-400 has a very nice MTF chart, not very fast but looks like a pretty decent lens for the price. ($540)

However that's probably not the lens that will be on your camera most of the time.

If I were you I'd spend just a little extra to get the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It's $500 v $269 for the 18-125 but it's a much better lens by the look of their MTF charts, also the Canon has IS.

Chances are you will be taking most of your photos with the standard zoom, so I'd try to spend a little extra there to get better quality.

That's $500 + $540 = $1040 which is pretty close to your limit.
As far as the 135-400 goes, ya, its not the fastest, but I can just boost the ISO a little and it should do fine :G
For the Canon 17-85. . .Do you think I will miss the gap between 85mm and 135mm? Thats 50mm where I won't have a lens. . .
Also, how much do you think that I will use IS? I have used my DiMAGE 7Hi with a 28-200mm lens, and I have had no problems without IS. Is it worth paying 300 bucks MORE for the Canon 17-85 over the Sigma 18-125, just to get IS, and slightly better quality?
Thanks for the help!
Well only you can decide that. :-)

My view though is that the gap between the image quality on the two lenses is actually quite large - though I have not owned the Sigma. I'd be surprised if the gap in coverage bothered you.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 7, 2005, 8:12 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
KM_krazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
KM_krazy wrote:
Quote:
peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
The 135-400 has a very nice MTF chart, not very fast but looks like a pretty decent lens for the price. ($540)

However that's probably not the lens that will be on your camera most of the time.

If I were you I'd spend just a little extra to get the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It's $500 v $269 for the 18-125 but it's a much better lens by the look of their MTF charts, also the Canon has IS.

Chances are you will be taking most of your photos with the standard zoom, so I'd try to spend a little extra there to get better quality.

That's $500 + $540 = $1040 which is pretty close to your limit.
As far as the 135-400 goes, ya, its not the fastest, but I can just boost the ISO a little and it should do fine :G
For the Canon 17-85. . .Do you think I will miss the gap between 85mm and 135mm? Thats 50mm where I won't have a lens. . .
Also, how much do you think that I will use IS? I have used my DiMAGE 7Hi with a 28-200mm lens, and I have had no problems without IS. Is it worth paying 300 bucks MORE for the Canon 17-85 over the Sigma 18-125, just to get IS, and slightly better quality?
Thanks for the help!
Well only you can decide that. :-)

My view though is that the gap between the image quality on the two lenses is actually quite large - though I have not owned the Sigma. I'd be surprised if the gap in coverage bothered you.
Do you know where I can see an MTF chart for the 17-85? I was reading here,
http://forum.deviantart.com/gallerie...372232/7042892
and a few people said that they had had bad experence with the 17-85(for not being sharp and whatnot). . .so I suppose the sigma 18-125 will just be worse?
also, about the IS. . . since I have never used IS before, is it really all its cracked up to be?:lol:
Thanks
KM_krazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 12:48 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 63
Default

peripatetic wrote:
Quote:
The 135-400 has a very nice MTF chart, not very fast but looks like a pretty decent lens for the price. ($540)

However that's probably not the lens that will be on your camera most of the time.

If I were you I'd spend just a little extra to get the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS USM. It's $500 v $269 for the 18-125 but it's a much better lens by the look of their MTF charts, also the Canon has IS.

Chances are you will be taking most of your photos with the standard zoom, so I'd try to spend a little extra there to get better quality.

That's $500 + $540 = $1040 which is pretty close to your limit.
Can you direct me to where you are seeing the Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM for $500? Everywhere I look its $599+. I checked Adorama and B&H. Should I be looking elsewhere?
Bilbo99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 1:39 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
KM_krazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
Default

Anyone know how the Tokina Zoom Telephoto AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 AT-X 840AF, would compare to the Sigma Zoom Telephoto 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO? Its just as fast, and about $100 bucks cheaper. . .
KM_krazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 2:55 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

KM_krazy
Quote:
Do you know where I can see an MTF chart for the 17-85? I was reading here,
http://forum.deviantart.com/gallerie...372232/7042892
and a few people said that they had had bad experence with the 17-85(for not being sharp and whatnot). . .so I suppose the sigma 18-125 will just be worse?
also, about the IS. . . since I have never used IS before, is it really all its cracked up to be?:lol:
Thanks
MTF chart for 17-85:

http://www.canon.com.hk/En/Product/P...1&tag_id=10515

Look at the chart carefully, if someone is complaining about sharpness then they:
1. got a bad copy of the lens
2. seeing what they expect to see, they won't accept that anything without an L is a good lens
3. are using the 20D and are experiencing dissonance over the fact that their pictures aren't sharp enough - which is just ignorance - they don't know how to sharpen them.

If you search these forums I think you'll find a number of threads about how good it is as a lens. That's the thing about forums - you need to decide on the credibility of the people who post. Pick any lens or camera on the market and you can find people who think it's great or awful on a forum somewhere.

For some 17-85 samples you can check out my photos page:

http://vanderwooks.blogspot.com

IS works just as advertised, it allows you to handhold upto 3 stops faster than you otherwise would be able to. Note that this isn't much use for action shots, because the subject is still going to be blurred, but it's great for still scenes.

Hmm, yes I thought you could get it for $500, but I may have been mistaken perhaps it is $600.

peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 1:53 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Ewok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 142
Default

Quote:
Can you direct me to where you are seeing the Canon EF-S 17-85 IS USM for $500? Everywhere I look its $599+.
My local shop has it for $539.99. http://www.sanjosecamera.comI don't know what their shipping charges are like....
Ewok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 8, 2005, 2:14 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
KM_krazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
Default

Anyone know anything about the AF speed on the Sigma 135-400?
KM_krazy 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 9:56 PM.