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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 23, 2005, 6:36 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

I just recieved my Canon 70-200 f/4 and took about 2 or 3 hundred pics with it. I admit it is a really good lense but I do miss the 2.8. So now my delima is this. Keep the set up I have now, Canon 70-200 f/4 LSigma 135-400 4.5/5.6or send back the Canon,sell the Sigma 135-400 and buy the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and a 2x teleconverter. Which one would be the better and faster set up.

What would you do?


arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 24, 2005, 12:39 AM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

well the 70-200 2.8 will give you the 2.8 that you so desire.. the 2xtc will give you range to 400 at f5.6 but you will lose some image quality and contrast with the teleconverter..

if you were primarily going to use it as a 70-200 2.8 w/o the teleconverter, i would say this is a good combination.. if you plan on using it more w/ the teleconverter, i would advise you to get a sigma 100-300 f4 with a 1.4 teleconverter.. as in general you will get much better results with a 1.4 vs 2.0 teleconverter..

but, the equipment you do have is all quality stuff, i would really consider whether its worth it or not..


g'luck, dustin
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2005, 3:07 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
twofruitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 137
Default

ive got the sigma 70-200 2.8 w/ the 2x teleconverter.

great shots with and without the converter on, highly recommended.
twofruitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2005, 1:54 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Got to be the Canon L. Of course you know that.
LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2005, 6:51 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 213
Default

Well I thought about it long and hard and I decided to return the Canon 70-200 f/4. Not because it was a bad lense. It produced great images and was a joy to use. But because I wanted a 2.8 lense and some longer reach. I already have the Tamron 28-75 2.8 so I ordered the Sigma 100-300 f/4 and a 1.4 tele also by sigma. This will give me the reach I want and it only cost me 950 dollars with shipping from Abes of Maine. 17th Street Photo doesnt carry that lense for some reason. And next month I will get the sigma 70-200 2.8 for indoor stuff and then all I will have left to buy is a wide angle lense and my photo bag will be complete. Heavy,but complete.

Thanks again for all the help guys.
arowana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 4:49 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Yeah, complete pants with all that S*gma glass. Yeeuck!
LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 6:49 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

arowana wrote:
Quote:
... I ordered the Sigma 100-300 f/4 and a 1.4 tele also by sigma
Excellent choice... IMO it's one of the best value out there
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 10:56 AM   #8
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i agree... enjoy your new glass..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 11:03 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

You do know that Canon does not make all their own lens inards, like every large company trying to keep costs down they out-source to other vendors. Tamron for one, makes the inards of some of your beloved Canon lenses.

Also one of the worst lenses I have ever owned was an over priced Canon 100-300 L. That said, most of the Canon L lenses are good, just extremely overprieced for what you get.
In my early days I also used to only go for the "L", then the "mystique of the white lens" wore off and I came to my senses after trying some of the other brands.

Peter.

LBoy wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, complete pants with all that S*gma glass. Yeeuck!
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 26, 2005, 11:05 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

arowana wrote:
Quote:
... I ordered the Sigma 100-300 f/4 and a 1.4 tele also by sigma
Excellent choice...

Peter.
PeterP 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 3:31 PM.