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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 30, 2005, 1:10 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 92
Default

Go with the Sigma. It's one of Sigma's best offerings. See my site for test shots www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
fstopjojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 30, 2005, 6:25 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
bigboyhf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 165
Default

Thanks for the feedback. Picked up the Sigma 2.8 and the 1.4 tele today. Of course I had to buy another bag, filters, monopod etc. Who said photography was an inexpensive hobby... :G I have 10 days to try it out, but it didn't feel too heavy on first impressions and I have yet to check out the few pics I snapped, but they looked pretty sharp on the lcd.

H
bigboyhf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2005, 7:56 AM   #13
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

fstopjojo wrote:
Quote:
Go with the Sigma. It's one of Sigma's best offerings. See my site for test shots http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
... and I partially agree

-> Sigma best offering is the 100-300 f/4 EX - It costs less than a 70-200 f/2.8 EX with a 1.4x teleconverter and is practically a prime (just check its MTF against the EF 300 f/4L)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2005, 10:32 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 92
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
fstopjojo wrote:
Quote:
Go with the Sigma. It's one of Sigma's best offerings. See my site for test shots http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests
... and I partially agree

-> Sigma best offering is the 100-300 f/4 EX - It costs less than a 70-200 f/2.8 EX with a 1.4x teleconverter and is practically a prime (just check its MTF against the EF 300 f/4L)
...to which I almost agree as Sigma's very best offering is the 120-300 f2.8 EX. :G
fstopjojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2005, 11:06 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
SlapNTickleJr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 151
Default

I agree with both of you. The 70-200 f/2.8, 100-300 f/4, and 120-300 f/2.8 all rock! And fstopjojo did say that it was one of Sigma's best offerings, not the best offering.
SlapNTickleJr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2006, 9:33 AM   #16
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

SlapNTickleJr wrote:
Quote:
I agree with both of you. The 70-200 f/2.8, 100-300 f/4, and 120-300 f/2.8 all rock! And fstopjojo did say that it was one of Sigma's best offerings, not the best offering.
I'm a little biais toward the 100-300 f/4, since I have the 70-200 and 120-300 f/2.8 already: :-) :lol: :G





The issue with the 120-300 f/2.8 EX is that it costs more than any Canon L zooms which is a problem for most folks... :?

-> See people are willing to pay for Canon best, while most only experienced cheap 3rd party lenses. IMO all Sigma EX series rock, and this is coming from a person who have several L's!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2006, 11:51 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 92
Default

Yes, it does cost more than even the 70200IS, but Canon really has no answer to this particular Sigma glass. 120-300EX f2.8 is sui generis: in a class by itself really.
fstopjojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 12:10 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
bigboyhf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 165
Default

I have been experimenting with the 2.8 lens and have found that wide open, the dof is really pretty thin. I have been taking pics of my dogs playing at the park and to keep the shutter speed fairly high, I took advantage of the 2.8 setting. I focused as best as I could on the dogs nose or eye and the results were that only a few inches were completely focused. I shot another couple of gigs today in the yard with higher stops and had better luck.

I'm not sure how the above bird pic was captured at 2.8 with the entire wingspan remaining in focus...

H
bigboyhf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 4:58 AM   #19
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

bigboyhf

The bird was taken @ f/4.5, it was meant to show the fast AF, and not the Bokeh of this lens which is what the flower was for @ f/2.8, IMO this lens has one the best Bokeh (short of a Minolta 70-200 f/2.8 SSM...)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2006, 5:22 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
JohnReid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 734
Default

I have the Sigma 80 to 200. Its made me reconsider all my other lenses.

Its so sharp, when I crop the photo to give me the same range as my 175 to 500, it is still sharper (btw, I used the 170 to 500 on a tripod, with mirror lockup and a cable release. The 170 to 500 is not far from useless).
JohnReid 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 7:12 PM.