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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 7, 2006, 4:45 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

Hi there,

In a short while I'm going to replace my kitlens (I will keep it though) for another lens. I will use this lens as my new walkaround lens. I've narrowed my choices down to 3 lenses. The prices are from The Netherlands (where I live).

- Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO €399,-
- Canon 24-105L F4 IS €898,-
- Canon 24-70L F2.8 €1188,-

I'm not going to invest in EF-S lenses (although I have a 350D) and I do not want a lens in the 28-x range.

Concerning the Sigma. This is a bargain for a F2.8 lens, although there are a lot of bad stories (unusable wide open, unable to focus @ F2.8 24mm) on this lens (or is it the older NON MACRO lens?). I know it doesn't have HSM and the filter size is huge (altough I also have the Sigma 100-300 EX F4 HSM which has the same filter size). Can someone who actually owns this lens comment on this.

The Canon 24-105L seems like a nice lens. It gets nice reviews, the range is great, IS is not really something that I must have. It's fast with its USM and it's a F4 lens. Reviews from Photozone and here are rather positive (apart from the old flare issue).

The Canon 24-70L is a heavy lens (I don't really mind) that is highly regarded. This is a beautiful lens with nice bokeh. Of course it's F2.8 which I would really like. The negative about this lens is that it's so expensive here in The Netherlands. It's €1188,- that's €300,- more than the 24-105! Comparing this to US prices where the 24-70L is actually cheaper at BH Photo (€882,- for the 24-70 and €976,- for the 24-105), this is rather annoying and a big reason why you don't see many 24-70Ls here.

Can you give me some advice concerning these lenses? Like I mentioned before I would also like a comment from someone who has the Sigma.

Thanks for the help!

Tim
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 7, 2006, 6:29 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Default

"I'm not going to invest in EF-S lenses (although I have a 350D)"

Why not?
There are 17-50f2.8 (or thereabouts) from sigma, tamron and tokina that will provide pics just as good on a crop camera as any of the lenses you list for a third the price of the two L lenses as well as having a more useful focal range. Buy one and sell it if you ever go full-frame. Much better than splashing out a grand for an L and then needing to buy an ef-s lens anyway to get any kind of wide-angle.
jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2006, 8:42 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Exactly - I would go even further than what jacks has said in that @ f/2.8, the 3rd party 'digital' lenses exceed the L in resolution by a wide margin (even @ the borders):
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_28/index.htm
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/len...0_28/index.htm

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 @ 24mm MTF's:
Center - f/2.8: 1846 f/4: 2050 f/5.6: 2073 f/8: 2002
Border - f/2.8: 1757 f/4: 1903 f/5.6: 1931 f/8: 1917

Canon 24-70 L f/2.8 @ 24mm MTF's:
Center - f/2.8: 1592 f/4: 1787 f/5.6: 1896 f/8: 1896
Border - f/2.8: 1526 f/4: 1634 f/5.6: 1824 f/8: 1819

-> The Tamron is also sharper than the 17-40 L at 17mm (and @ every other focal lenghts as well)

An EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 is something else because it's as costly as the L, but there are plenty of affordable alternative :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2006, 9:40 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

Thanks for the replies. I don't want EF-S lenses because I want to upgrade to fullframe or a 1.3X crop body in a while. I don't feel like buying the EF-S lenses and selling them in about a year with a loss. I'd rather buy some quality lenses that I can use on future bodies (and on film). So that's the reason for that.

I'm still interested though in the 3 lenses that I mentioned. Your toughts on that?
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2006, 10:23 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Then the Canon 24-105L F4 IS would be my vote...
... and the
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX will be the 2nd choice if you really really really need f/2.8
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 7, 2006, 11:07 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 166
Default

Timberland

Have you tried any of these lenses on your camera yet? I can tell you that the Sigma and Canon 24-70 F2.8 lenses will be larger than the Canon 24-105mm. If the size does not bother you, then I will recomend the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8.

I have this lens for my 20D, and just love it. Mine is really sharp at F2.8. The focus is fast, a bit noisy, and accurate. The noise does not bother me, and it is a bit noisier than the kit lens that I had. One thing that I do not like it the manual focus setup on this lens, but I really don't use manual focus that much.

If your on a budget, the Sigma is a great lens. It can hold its own with the L lenses that you stated. Another good point is that it takes the same filter size as your other lens, so you don't have to get new filters if you have them.

Here is a pic of what this lens can do, and yes, its a cat images

Bill


Attached Images
 
Speedie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 8, 2006, 5:50 AM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 95
Default

Speedie wrote:
Quote:
Timberland

Have you tried any of these lenses on your camera yet? I can tell you that the Sigma and Canon 24-70 F2.8 lenses will be larger than the Canon 24-105mm. If the size does not bother you, then I will recomend the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8.

I have this lens for my 20D, and just love it. Mine is really sharp at F2.8. The focus is fast, a bit noisy, and accurate. The noise does not bother me, and it is a bit noisier than the kit lens that I had. One thing that I do not like it the manual focus setup on this lens, but I really don't use manual focus that much.

If your on a budget, the Sigma is a great lens. It can hold its own with the L lenses that you stated. Another good point is that it takes the same filter size as your other lens, so you don't have to get new filters if you have them.

Here is a pic of what this lens can do, and yes, its a cat images

Bill

Thanks for your reply Bill! An actual owner of the lens speaking is what I prefer!
Nice cat photo :blah:. You said that your Sigma is sharp wide open, would you mind post a 100% crop? A couple of other photos are also appreciated!

The size of the lens doesn't bother me! Is the AF even louder than the kitlens? Now that's loud!
Timberland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 2006, 2:14 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23
Default

HiTimberland,

I have the Canon 24-105L IS f4. No experience of the other lenses.

I use it as the walk round lens on my 5D. I rarely have to change it as the 4x zoom range is very large, and 24mm is very wide angle, although not on thesmall sensor bodies. I really like the lens although the combination is heavy, I have no idea how much heavierthe 2.8 lenses will be but you must consider this.

I think your decision to leave EFS lenses on the shelf is correct. Iowned the 20D with 17-85 IS, roughly the samerange as the 24-105 on the 5D. I of course had to sell it with the 20D. Also the prices are not too dissimilar, the EFS series seems very expensive. I lost a lot of money upgrading the 2EFS lenses when I changed bodies.
liningiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 2006, 2:14 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23
Default

HiTimberland,

I have the Canon 24-105L IS f4. No experience of the other lenses.

I use it as the walk round lens on my 5D. I rarely have to change it as the 4x zoom range is very large, and 24mm is very wide angle, although not on thesmall sensor bodies. I really like the lens although the combination is heavy, I have no idea how much heavierthe 2.8 lenses will be but you must consider this.

I think your decision to leave EFS lenses on the shelf is correct. Iowned the 20D with 17-85 IS, roughly the samerange as the 24-105 on the 5D. I of course had to sell it with the 20D. Also the prices are not too dissimilar, the EFS series seems very expensive. I lost a lot of money upgrading the 2EFS lenses when I changed bodies.
liningiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 2006, 2:41 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 166
Default

Here is a crop from the cat:


Attached Images
 
Speedie 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 11:50 PM.