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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 26, 2005, 8:27 AM   #11
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

The original poster also ask about more flexibility of the zoom...

Also I hope you're aware of the DOF when wide open (... you'll hit the same limitation at f/1.4) which was what I tried to show Spec3 with the previous image of the 17-35 EX - You've seen their MTF and it exceeds the 16-35 L at the APS-C crop where most folks are using their camera at!

I have two L already, but several Sigmas meet my need as well - I just don't go blindly with any L then later wish I hadn't...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 9:29 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default



Well basically everything indoors. That doesn't involve getting in focus the back of the persons head in front of you to the back wall of the Cathedral that your interested in photographing. Anyway generally the wider open positions willhave enough DF in these situations anyway for wide angle lenses. Foreground objects are not always the interest.

Your example is your one perfect example for your argument. I give you that. Night time landscape with foreground and background interest. In which case nothings going to work except a tripod and the hope that nothing in the framemoves.

Its a trade off, which the poster will have to decide for himself.





LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 10:53 AM   #13
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

LBoy wrote:
Quote:

Its a trade off, which the poster will have to decide for himself.






i don't see the tradeoff.. the poster wants a zoom for flexibility.. so primes shouldnt even be considered here.. and to save 900$ AND get a sharper lens.. choice seems fairly obvious..

plus.. and this is big... with the money he saves, he can keep his fast prime.. what else can you ask for..

regards, dustin

Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 11:43 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Eh ???

You believe that adding another canon Prime L is not adding flexibility to your camera bag.

You believe having the ability to utilize F1.4 over the Canon zoom's 2.8 and the Sig*plaaa's f4 at 35 is not adding more flexibility to your shooting capabilities if not abilities ? ? ?

And if you don't see that this decision is a trade off between very different shooting conditions then fine, good luck with that train of thought.

Anyway back to the original question.

DaMat, I have and use the Canon 16 -35. I can highly recommend it.Its a great lens that wont let you down. If you really need the flexibility of 16mm fine. Nothing was mentioned on the original post of a 1.6 sensor be used in this case. Generally I don't use much wider 24or 20 anyway. (Then again I'm not with a 1.6x camera).

Quote:
Currently shooting w/Canon, 24mm/1.4L & having great results.


Still fast primes will save your bacon on many occasions and if I can read between the lines to the original post I canonly assume this is often the case with the lens you are currently using. It echos my own sentiments.

Also I don't think the originator was asking about Sigma lenses at any point.




LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 4:57 PM   #15
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

sure a prime will add flexibility to your camera bag.. but will it add as much flexibility as a nice zoom.. no.. it forces you to switch lenses, which in turn can make you miss shots.. so i argue having a nice zoom can "save your bacon"

and you are argueing that this poster's abilities will be improved by buying another L-series prime, implying they will not be improved with a nice zoom... c'mon. .ability has nothing to do with equipment.. you know that.. i hope..

and i don't know what you aversion to sigma is.. have you tried an EX series lens.. probably not.. your too blinded by the "L" blanket over your head... and the fact that you repeatedly call it an L versus L-series gives me some insight as well..

and while the originator did not mention the sigma.. i was merely giving an alternative that we have proven is just as capable as your L-series for a fraction of the price... thats information i think is more than relevent here..

regards, dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 4:47 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Wow... dear oh dear,

1.
Quote:
sure a prime will add flexibility to your camera bag.. but will it add as much flexibility as a nice zoom.. no.. it forces you to switch lenses, which in turn can make you miss shots.. so i argue having a nice zoom can "save your bacon"
If you read back you'll see I said it was a trade off the poster would have to decide upon. Which youdecided in your wisdom to have a pop at, by saying you dont see the trade off.

The zoom will add flexibility when there is little time to change lenses, I agree some what, but ok.

The prime will add flexibility when there is low light, as the one I have suggested is far superior at gathering light. It is up to the photographer to decide if the shot is still worth while at the particular aperture then forced into. But at least he has more options.

As there is hardly a large zoom range on this particular model spoken about and most framing of shots is done post-processing by many, I'm not sure that this is the most flexible of the two above flexible options ..so to speak.

As the poster is working with a prime at the moment and has stated"is it worth the effort to change to the zoom for more flexibility", I'm thinking he's not really finding this a problem or he would not need to ask the question. He would definitely know - "mmmmyesI need a zoom lens asI'mmissing too many shots and oh look my bacons all fried and burnt now." :-)



2.
Quote:
and you are argueing that this poster's abilities will be improved by buying another L-series prime, implying they will not be improved with a nice zoom... c'mon. .ability has nothing to do with equipment.. you know that.. i hope..

Firstly, I didnt imply that,only youassumed this.

Secondly, if you had read my post you would have saw that I wrote :

"You believe having the ability to utilize F1.4 over the Canon zoom's 2.8 and the Sig*plaaa's f4 at 35 is not adding more flexibility to your shooting capabilities if not abilities ? ? ?"


That was, I repeat : "CAPABILITIES IF NOT ABILITIES."

Maybe you dont understand the meaning of these two words ? :? Jeesss...Unbeleivable !

3.
Quote:
and i don't know what you aversion to sigma is.. have you tried an EX series lens.. probably not.. your too blinded by the "L" blanket over your head... and the fact that you repeatedly call it an L versus L-series gives me some insight as well..
Everything I say about Sigma is a parody, tongue in cheek. I do have a preference for Canon and certain lenses. Some L's are better than others. That is all. I mean look at the daft name I picked, almost as daft as yours. :-)

I wont give you an economy lesson but Simga lenses are cheaper than Canon. For those on a budget - this isfine - knock yourself out. But it is intrinsically linked to performance and quality. There will always be the odd exception to this, but it will generally hold true. Or Canon (Lens division for those who want to be picky)would simply go out of business.

Now if you think my shortening of L-series to simply L when I am writing on a medium such a Internet forum gives you some sort of misplaced insight, then I can only say in retrospect that a certain "insight" into your own rather narrow focal length is quite apparent. :blah:


LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2005, 1:34 PM   #17
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

as anyone who has been on these forumns for long has hopefully seen.. i try to be as helpful to everyone as i can, and try to do so in a non-biased manner.. i have no loyalty to sigma, canon, whoever.. (ok, mb to canon bodies, but not lenses).. i try to present a non-biased opinion based on personal experience, evidence from mtfs and examples, and experience from other posters.. and when i do give advice, i try to back it up with evidence, in the form of links or mtfs.. unfortunately, i have not been overly helpful in the second half of this forumn.. i allowed my irritation to cause an emotional reply.. i just wanted to apologize to the original poster and hope that you makesyour decision based on the evidence presented and not on emotionally driven opinions.. also, for the most part this is a friendly place, and i hope we have not dissuaded you from asking other questions or from being a part of steve's forumns...

let us know if we can be of any other assistance..

dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2005, 5:10 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 23
Default

I guess I should have tried to break it down better........ my line of thinking was " would it be better to lose the fixed 24mm and go with the 16 - 35mm simply for flexibility reasons ".
DaMat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2005, 11:44 PM   #19
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

yes.. ditching the 24mm for a 16-35 zoom will improve you flexibility quite a bit.. with today's modern digital slrs.. bumping up the ISO can make up for the lost speed easily..

best regards, dustin

p.s. keeping the 24 and getting a cheaper (sigma 17-35) zoom will improve you flexibility even more.. (sorry, couldn't resist slipping that in there)
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2005, 9:53 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

It wont end up cheaper when you end up bouncing that Sigma off a brick wall. What then, Hards cheese?

You´ll love the 16-35, but remember to come back to this thread later to tell us all how much you miss the prime.

How much are you going to pick up for it second hand? Curious.


LBoy 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 8:05 PM.