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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 14, 2005, 2:41 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
johnsonM86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 723
Default

also do you think i could use this lens for the wedding that i have to shoot in september? the ceremony will be outdoors around midday.

michael
johnsonM86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 3:49 AM   #12
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

it should be fine for your wedding.. especially outdoors, indoors i might suggest the 2.8..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 8:28 AM   #13
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

As long as you have a brand blinder on - You are never going to see the excellent Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 EX with HSM for only 1/2 the cost of the Canon's :?

http://www.naturephotographers.net/mg0600-1.html
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 11:23 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

Something else one may wish to consider when choosing a lens for the 20D. The 20D's fastest most accurate AF mode only comes into play with a lens of f2.8 or faster.
csnudelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 11:36 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Caboose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 625
Default

I was a pretty dedicated Canon user myself. I needed the fast f/2.8, but I also needed the the extra $500 dollars in my pocket so I chose the Sigma 70-200mm, and have not regretted it at all. I have since bought two other sigma lenes with the money I saved from not the Canon version. I still have some Canon lenes and love them all, but 3 quality lens for the price of one. It didn't take me long to make up my mind.
Caboose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 12:44 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
johnsonM86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 723
Default

you said the sigma was half the cost of the canon, but I've changed my mind, deciding that i don't need the extra f-stop and added weight, in this case i'm getting the canon 70-200mm f4L and not the 2.8, the f4 version is only 579 USD whereas i just checked the 2.8 sigma and it's 879 USD. just to clarify.

michael

johnsonM86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 2:34 PM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 92
Default

Just for reference, you can get the new "DG" 70-200 EX for $725. A steal in my book. http://www.deltainternational.com/st...0%2D200CDG.htm
fstopjojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 2:55 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 69
Default

You mention added weight. This is why I went with the 135L f/2 and 1.4X TC. Decent weight, great optics and speed.
csnudelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 7:14 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 106
Default

johnsonM86:

I have the Canon 70-200mml f/4 and love it. I myself was considering the heavier sigma 70-200 2.8 lens but at the time was advised from a camera rep that the canon 70-200 was lighter and a really great lense. I shoot sports outside alot and have had no problemat all getting nice photos. Here are a few samples from the past few months. John


Attached Images
 
jcarboski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 14, 2005, 7:41 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
johnsonM86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 723
Default

thanks john! i'll be postin some pics with this lens hopefully by the end of the week!
Great shot by the way

michael
johnsonM86 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 6:27 PM.