Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 26, 2008, 12:12 AM   #21
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Westminster CA
Posts: 57
Default

TCav,

which of these lens would you say it's good for the A350.

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro

Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG lens

SAL-1680Z - Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom Lens
phamj57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2008, 12:28 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

phamj57 wrote:
Quote:
TCav,

which of these lens would you say it's good for the A350.

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC Macro

Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG lens

SAL-1680Z - Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom Lens
I'd pick the Tamron 17-50/2.8 over the Sigma 18-50/2.8. In fact, I DID pick the Tamron over the Sigma.

The 28-70/2.8 is a nice lens, and I'm looking for something in that approximate focal length myself. But on an APS-C sensor it's not very wide.

For weddings, I'd get the CZ 16/80 and a flash. It's not a fast as the others, but its as good if not better, and the range is better, and a flash will make up for the aperture.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2008, 12:45 AM   #23
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Westminster CA
Posts: 57
Default

TCav,



Thanks for your advice. I have a chance to test out the CZ on a A350 and A900 and it was awsome. I'm not just focusing on wedding, i want to get a good all around lens. I got a couples of long range lens already, i just need a really good short range one. the CZ its nice but also expensive.
phamj57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2008, 8:31 AM   #24
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

I use my Beercan and my Tamron 17-50/2.8 for about 98% of my shots, but I want the large aperture, so that's why I went with the Tamron. The Sigma 28-70/2.8 and the Tamron 28-75/2.8 are both good lenses, but don't cover the wide end on an APS-C sensor.

Yes, the Zeiss is expensive, but it's less than the Tamron 17-50/2.8 plus the Tamron 28-75/2.8. And it's the best lens of it's kind available for any camera.

The only real complaint I've seen about the Ziess is the vignetting at 16mm. It goes away when you stop down one f-stop, but you can see the vignetting in the viewfinder because the aperture doesn't close until you take the shot. Otherwise, it's a superb lens, and will cover what you want to do quite nicely.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2008, 9:56 AM   #25
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 66
Default

I have the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 for my A300 and so far I really like the lens. I have only used it a few times but it seems very good for what I wanted. TCav suggested the Tamron originally but I really wanted something a bit longer. I was using an XTi with the 18-55 and was not happy with that range. He then suggested the Sigma, so it was down to that Sigma or the Zeiss that you are looking at. The CZ has some very good reviews but in most of the reviews it also suffered from some issues that it should not have considering the price.

So I have the Sigma 17-70 and a Beercan, I am thinking I should be good for a while. The next lens I am considering would be a 50mm 1.4 or 7
Raistlin_01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2008, 10:46 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Yes, the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 is a very good lens. It has a good range for what you want to do, and costs ~$400 compared to the Zeiss' ~$700. Thank you, Raistlin_01.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2008, 10:07 PM   #27
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Westminster CA
Posts: 57
Default

if you have a choice between the CZ 16-80 and Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 for the same price, which would you purchase?
phamj57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 8, 2008, 8:10 AM   #28
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

For the same price?

No question.

The Zeiss.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2008, 10:15 AM   #29
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 66
Default

TCav wrote:
Quote:
For the same price?

No question.

The Zeiss.
Even with some of the negative comments on many of the reviews I have read? They all said the lens was good but for a Zeiss lens was lacking something. I can't remember all the reviews, but I do remember there being a "but" in many of them about this lens.
Raistlin_01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2008, 10:37 AM   #30
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Raistlin_01 wrote:
Quote:
Even with some of the negative comments on many of the reviews I have read? They all said the lens was good but for a Zeiss lens was lacking something. I can't remember all the reviews, but I do remember there being a "but" in many of them about this lens.
Everyone has high expectations whenever the name Zeiss comes up. Zeiss doesn't do a lot of zoom lenses, and zoom lenses are likely to be lessgood that primes, even if they are from Zeiss.

But the Zeiss still runs rings around the Sigma 17-70, and is, in fact, the best lens of its kind, for any camera.

My preference is for available light, however, so I'll stick with my Tamron 17-50/2.8, but if I could get a CZ 16-80 for the price of a Sigma 17-70, I just might learn to love flash.
TCav 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 1:30 PM.