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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 21, 2006, 4:54 PM   #11
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Striderxl wrote:
Quote:
1 more quick question.If I get this lens and then the 24-70 2.8 EX or the Tamron28-75 F2.8XR Diis that 25 - 30 mm between these 2 lensthat I am missing a really big deal?
I doubt you'll miss the 70 to 100 range since anyone can easily do a 'digital' zoom in Photoshop!

The difference in the 24 vs 28 is quite different though -> you can't re-create what the narrower angle lens did not capture in the 1st place... :?
IMO you should even consider an 18-50mm f/2.8 :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2006, 5:02 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 127
Default

NHL

In your response you suggested the 18-50 f/2.8 lens...I assume you were referring to the Sigma lens. Is that an HSM lens? If not, should fast auto focus be a concern? The Sigma lens certainly has a significant price advantage over the Canon EF S 17-55 f2.8--USM although the Canon lens has image stabilization as well. Your thoughts?

Jerry
coachjerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2006, 6:41 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

I'm not NHL, but I'll take a shot at it.

First off, the sigma 18-50 f/2.8 does not have HSM - it's really up to you to decide if AF speed is going to be an issue. IMO I would be more concerned about the noise and no FTM.... It's not like you're going to use this lens for sports (unlikely, anyway), so I don't think speed will be an issue most of the time.

Second, the canon 17-85 needs IS because it is SLOOOOOW. On top of that, IS is not a replacement for aperture - you will not get a shallow DOF (compared to f/2.8 ) nor be able to use it for moving subjects. But the ring USM is always nice

So it boils down to the choice of

a limited focal range, but constant fast aperture
or
a larger focal range, but slower lens.
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2006, 6:50 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Striderxl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 300
Default

Hey Boy thanks alot.I sprreciate all help.Now that I have the 100-300 Sigma I will have to wait a bit but am think about the next lens I get.I might for with a 24-70 or so and a 12-24 for a full range.
Striderxl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2006, 7:12 PM   #15
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

coachjerry

I believe you're referring to the Canon EFs 17-55 f2.8 IS USM - Can you really compare though??? :idea:

$220 vs $1200 - IMO you're better off getting the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 which is quite good actually: http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/zoomvprimes

-> and then get another 18-50 f/2.8 in Minolta mount plus a 7D(~$800) camera with has built-in antishake (for all lenses) and still come out ahead!!!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 27, 2006, 8:10 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

opps, my mistake

BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2006, 6:37 AM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

BTW the FTM (Full-Time Manual overide of the AF) is also built-in to their dSLR so all lenses will have this feature on the Minolta, and not some lenses with ring USM only...
NHL 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 12:56 PM.