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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 20, 2005, 7:11 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7
Default

I've just got XT along with lens kits.I found that the optic is terrible and destroy my image.So i planed to get a new one.After reading many review i found good replies to these lens

Sigma 18-50 EX DC

Tamron SP 28-75 XR Di

Sigma 24-70 EX DG



The 24-70 isbulky andheavy.While Tammy is abit too long on 1.6X croped.Sigma 18-50 looks promising but it's not FF compatible which will be standard in next few years.I like touse my lenswith new camera body.

Yeah we can't have everything.Looks like we got no winner here.So, which lens is the best among these three? Iexpect the lens to have good color saturation and contrast.Which is better chice? Most of my shots taken is lanscape and portrait many in low light situation.Any advise appreciated. Thanks in advance.:-):-)



PS: if anyone got a good 4rd option in this price/range please let me know

hell_mephisto is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 20, 2005, 8:56 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

hell_mephisto wrote:
Quote:
PS: if anyone got a good 4rd option in this price/range please let me know
I would pick the 24-70 f/2.8 EX over any else; However if weight is a concern the 20-40 f/2.8 EX is lighter plus it's even wider when used on a FF!

BTW... Why are folks so concerned about the weight? Isn't it what we are paying for i.e. more glass (and metal to keep it together) - I don't know I much prefer weight over composite barrel materials and molded optics... Plus a full frame lens is always more bulky than a 'digital' only lens (to project a larger image onto the 24x36mm sensor) :-)

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2005, 2:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
AlpineMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 357
Default

I have not used the Sigma 24-70mm EX DG MACRO (make sure you get the MACRO, if you go with this lens), but from what I've seen in the reviews, it's a great lens. When Iresearched to get my first lens, it was a toss-up between the Sigma and the Tamron. I decided to go with the Tamron cuz of the longer warranty (6 yrs), compact size, and less weight.

I have used the Tamron 28-75mm (my former everyday lens) and the Sigma 18-50mm EX DC (my new everyday lens). Both of these lenses are compact and don't weigh too much. My short tests show the Sigma to be sharper than the Tamron wide open at all focal lengths. I wasn't thinking clearly when I deleted my test images...I have since sold my Tamron to finance my Sigma so I won't be able to recreate them to show here. One other deciding factor for me was to have a wider angle lens. You might think 18mm vs 28mm isn't much...but it is in APS-C cameras like my 20D. 18mm is equivalent to 28.8mm, whereas 28mm is 44.8mm on my camera. Since I take more wide angles than telephoto, the Sigma was the lens for me. I don't care too much that the Sigma 18-50mm is not for full frame, I can always sell it with my 20D if I decide to go full frame.
AlpineMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2005, 7:20 PM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

well, it really depends.. if you are going to do any landscape/cityscape type stuff, get the 18-50 2.8.. itssharp as a tack and the build quality is excellent.. (and imo, 1.6x AND FF are both going to be standards in the future, take your pick)..and towards its long end it works nicely for portraits..


the 24-70 2.8 is a superb lens.. but its not really wide enough for landscape.. it is a perfect portrait lens though and the bokeh is better than the 18-50..
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 21, 2005, 4:08 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 51
Default

Got myself the Sigma 24-70, can recommend it!

Ciao, Wolfie:-)


P.S.: I was in the same fix, finally got myself in addition to the Sigma the Tokina 12-24 - very fine lens, too.
wolfie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2005, 8:59 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7
Default

seconded the above an excellent lens ( albeit a noisy focus )
amarko5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 7:02 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

hell_mephisto wrote:
Quote:
I've just got XT along with lens kits.I found that the optic is terrible and destroy my image.
By all means buy yourself a nice new lens, but the optics of the kit lens are NOT terrible. A decent photographer can take some very good pictures with the kit lens. At f8 you would be very hard pressed to tell the difference between any of those lenses v the kit lens.

I don't mean to offend you but if your pictures are TERRIBLE then the problem is most likely the photographer not the lens.

You might be better off spending the money on a photography course rather than new equipment, I got myself the equipment I wanted and my last and next few outlays are all going on courses not equipment.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 9:42 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7
Default

I don't mean to offend you but if your pictures are TERRIBLE then the problem is most likely the photographer not the lens.


Thanks for your recommend,peripatetic.I'm not pro but quite sure the problem is the lens.Sorry,I didn't state my problem before.

1. The kit lens is really terriblewith heavypincushion distortion @55mm.That's really destroy my image.(I hate to do PS to each image).I can notice this even in tiny XT's LCD.Also some barrel but not that bad compare to pincushion. I can live with barrel but definetly not pincushion.

2.In low light,the lens just can't focus.And F3.5 is not that fast.Fucus speed is very slow in low contrast/light subjects(although It's fast compare to it's price).Not to mention how noisy this thingproduce.

3.I have to say it again.I just don't like contrast of the lens .It produces dull images.Also color produced by the lens is not natural.(Perhaps it's the lens or XT color characteristics? maybe both?)


4. Idon't have that3 stopsin low light to step down from f2.8 to f8. F2.8 is a must.


Anyways,Thanks for all your comments guys.I think the tamron is out of the way.Cuz it's rotating front element.

Regards

Konpanas

hell_mephisto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 9:53 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

I would also pick the 24-70 f/2.8 EX just to get the extra 4mm at the wide end.

I have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 sp xr di and the front element does not rotate when focusing.


Quote:
Anyways,Thanks for all your comments guys.I think the tamron is out of the way.Cuz it's rotating front element.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2005, 10:09 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

Dang, I just wrote a reply and my txt got lost. Here goes again...

All of the lenses you mention are good lenses, you should just choose the one with the focal length and speed that matches your style... However, I own the Tamron 28-75 XRDi and it absolutely rocks. In fact, it is the only lens I use that isn't a Canon L, and I use it more than any other lens I own. Many of the photos in the weddings section on my website http://www.imagineimagery.com were taken with this lens, as well as this one:


ChrisDM 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 2:54 PM.