| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/28/2006 11:37:32 PM · #1 |
I am currently looking for a Wide Angle Lens. I have a 350D and i was told not too purchase the sigma brand as the genuine Canon lenses have a image stabiliser in them and the canon body's do not have image stabliser in them. Im so confused. If i buy a Sigma lens will I need to put the camera on a monopod or tripod if i want to use it????
any thoughts |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 11:40:57 PM · #2 |
I have the Sigma 10-20mm (for Nikon) and am very happy with it. When you're shooting wide angles in particular, you're less likely to need to worry about camera shake than you would be for a long lens. Whoever told you that you need IS for a wide angle lens doesn't seem to be handing out the world's best advice, in my opinion.
Message edited by author 2006-08-28 23:41:25. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 11:41:57 PM · #3 |
None of the wide angle lenses have IS. In fact, you don't really need it in a wide lens, because the field of view is so large that a movement which would blur an object 200ft away seen through a telephoto lens, would barely affect the same object since it would take up so little of the frame with a wide angle. So you can get away with 1/20th or so, where you'd need maybe 1/400th with a tele.
The Canon brand is an excellent lens, I would go with that rather than the Sigma personally. |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 11:44:13 PM · #4 |
You're less likely to need IS (or VR) on a wide angle than any other lens. And if you are shooting in low light then of course you need a tripod.
The Sigma is a very nice lens, but the Cannon is awesome, if you can afford it go for the cannon.
|
|
|
|
08/28/2006 11:47:22 PM · #5 |
It's a tought end to look for lenses but depends how wide you want. None has IS that I know of in the ultra-wide category but you can hand hold to a crazy slow speed with ultra-wides.
The Canon 10-22 is very quickly becomming my fav lens (I have only had it a month or so). The Tokina would be the only other choice IMO (I came VERY close to getting it over the Canon) but it's only 12mm vs 10mm on the canon which pushed me to the Canon after some wallet searching :-). |
|
|
|
08/28/2006 11:52:12 PM · #6 |
very happy with my 10-22 canon and have never had an issue that could have been avoided with IS.
I am glad i paid the extra for the canon and would recommend it.
nick
|
|
|
|
08/29/2006 01:47:54 AM · #7 |
Another vote for the Canon 10-22mm here; simply an excellent, excellent lens.
R.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2006 01:58:35 AM · #8 |
I can personally vouch for the Sigma 12-24. It's aspherical too, so you get no fisheye. Works well on a 1.6 crop camera just as well as a full-frame. It's short and fat, though, and I couldn't ever use my built-in flash (leaves a lens shadowon close-shots). But you 350D users have a higher flash bulb than me, so you might be okay.
Can I use this thread to plug the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 as well? No? Oh well...
Message edited by author 2006-08-29 02:00:59. |
|
|
|
08/29/2006 03:26:09 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by wimbello:
I can personally vouch for the Sigma 12-24. It's aspherical too, so you get no fisheye. Works well on a 1.6 crop camera just as well as a full-frame. It's short and fat, though, and I couldn't ever use my built-in flash (leaves a lens shadowon close-shots). But you 350D users have a higher flash bulb than me, so you might be okay.
|
I'll second that.
If I thought I would never shoot full frame, I'd get the Canon 10-22 though. I didn't when I bought my Sigma, because the Canon lens didn't exist yet. |
|
|
|
08/29/2006 03:32:38 AM · #10 |
Yet another vote for the Canon 10-22mm lens. If there's a better super-wide for the 350D, I haven't seen it.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2006 03:49:09 AM · #11 |
Just got the 10-22 myself. The Sigma 10-20 felt more substantial in the hand although the copy I tested was considerably less sharp than the Canon around the edges. The Canon 10-22 does feel a bit plasticky by comparison, but the USM focus is superb.
I'm still learning how to effectively make use of such a huge angle of view, it's surprising just how much different 10mm is from the 18mm kit lens I was using previously.
|
|
|
|
08/29/2006 08:46:42 AM · #12 |
| The Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4.0 AT-X 124AF Pro DX is a well reviewed and respected lens. It's worth some serious consideration and rates highly against it's Nikon and Canon counterparts. |
|
|
|
08/29/2006 09:24:40 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Another vote for the Canon 10-22mm here; simply an excellent, excellent lens.
R. |
I agree!! 3rd party lenses ALWAYS disappoint me. This Canon lens WILL NOT disappoint!! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 04:14:47 PM EDT.
