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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 29, 2005, 3:30 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

Hi There!

After reading on forums forever, Ifinally purchased the Rebel XT with the kitlens a couple of months ago. I'm very happy with it.
After just a month a bought a Sigma 100-300 F4 (love the HSM, feel, bokeh) lens. I was going on a trip to Australia and I would really love to bring a telezoom. I'm glad I purchased the lens!

Now I'm looking for a new midzoom/wideangle lens (that I'm going to buy in a month or 2), but it's pretty difficult to choose. The lens should handle lowlight (F2.8). I diffinately want a lens that is FF compatible, so all the EFS and DC lenses are not on my list.

I'm thinking of:
- Sigma 24-70 F2.8 (my first choice, because of my other wonderful Sigma lens, but HSM would be great :-))
- Sigma 28-75 F2.8
- Tamron 28-75 F2.8
- Canon 24-70 F2.8
- Canon 17-40 F4

I really like the range of the kitlens. So I don't think 28mm on my XT will be wide enough (I have to buy a Tamron 17-35 or Sigma 17-35 lens then). Am I missing a couple of lenses, or can someone recommend any of these lenses.

Thanks!
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 29, 2005, 4:37 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Excellent choice - the Sigma 100-300 f/4 is an excellent lens for folks who shoot mostly with the 70-200 f/2.8 with a 1.4x on most of the time -> It's MTF is superior to the EF-300 f/4 and cost less than a 1,4xTC and 70-200 f/2.8 combo!

Too bad the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 does not come with HSM though
If you want HSM and full-frame then you're narrowed to just two lenses (I have both BTW): the 12-24 EX HSM, and the 17-35 EX HSM f/2.8-4 pictured below:




... and @ f/2.8:


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2005, 6:09 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

As always, very helpfull NHL, thanks!
I really, really, really like my Sigma 100-300! I have to get used to handholding it btw, I'm still using it on a tripod.

When you see what gear I've got (not much). What lens would you suggest NHL? And why hasn't the Sigma 24-70 gotHSM? A real wide-angle lens (12-24) would be , but I think I also need the 30-70 range. And I just have the money for one of these lenses.

Beautiful photos btw.
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2005, 6:24 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 20
Default

What lenses would appear in the recommendations if FF was not an issue?

Philippe
ariaudo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2005, 8:29 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

ariaudo wrote:
Quote:
What lenses would appear in the recommendations if FF was not an issue?

Philippe
I don't know. I just want (quality) lenses that are FF compatible.
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2005, 9:41 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

ariaudo wrote:
Quote:
What lenses would appear in the recommendations if FF was not an issue?
At the wide angle, but still with f/2.8:
o Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX
o Sigma 20-40 EX f/2.8 EX (another FF, but not wide enough IMO)

Not as fast:
o EF-S 17-85 f/4.5-5.6 with USM and IS
o Sigma 18-125 f/3.5-5.6

... if you can live with 24 only and f/4 then the new EF 24-105 is also tempting - Kind of make me wonder to get rid of my EF 28-135 IS USM, this lens is getting really loose!!!

NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2005, 3:03 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

NHL, what would be your choice of lens. If you see my 'situation'.
Canon 350D, kitlens and Sigma 100-300 F4.
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2005, 5:48 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
LBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 661
Default

Two nice shots NHL. Pity about the sky in the first. Bracket the exposure and add it in non blown in PS.

haha, sorry for the critique. :-)
LBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2005, 6:02 AM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Timberland wrote:
Quote:
NHL, what would be your choice of lens. If you see my 'situation'.
Canon 350D, kitlens and Sigma 100-300 F4.
The EF 17-85 IS USM will be the first choice if FF and f/2.8 are no longer a requirement - This lens has gone down in price tremendously. The Sigma 18-125 would be next...



LBoy wrote:
Quote:
Two nice shots NHL. Pity about the sky in the first. Bracket the exposure and add it in non blown in PS.
I learned from critique...

I did bracket the shots - just too lazy to overlay them, cropping the top off would be more expedient and do not detract much from the scene (or add my carribean blue sky from another picture) :G

... of course I can always blame the camera for not having enough dynamic range like some folks here accusing the lenses for their own short coming
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2005, 6:38 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Timberland wrote:
Quote:
NHL, what would be your choice of lens. If you see my 'situation'.
Canon 350D, kitlens and Sigma 100-300 F4.
The EF 17-85 IS USM will be the first choice if FF and f/2.8 are no longer a requirement - This lens has gone down in price tremendously. The Sigma 18-125 would be next...
Thanks, but FF and F2.8 are still a requirement (for me at least). What would you recommend now? Thanks NHL!
Timberland 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 5:45 PM.