| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/11/2005 04:16:34 PM · #1 |
I recently found a couple of sigma lenses on sale on ebay for $209, which seems like a really good price. I am just not sure of the quality of the lenses. If anyone is familiar with them take a look and tell me what you think.
two sigma lenses
take a look and let me know what you think. I'm thinking that I would need a wide angle lens for a couple of weddings coming up.
Thanks
Message edited by author 2005-01-11 16:25:26. |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 04:23:13 PM · #2 |
It says the listing has been removed...
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 04:25:55 PM · #3 |
| oops left out a couple of #s that should take care of it |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 04:48:19 PM · #4 |
The price sounds good. I would check Nextag to see how the prices compare.
I prefer fixed max aperature lenses over the variable ones, but then I prefer primes over zooms.
My son still uses variable aperature Sigma zooms and he gets sharp images.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 04:56:26 PM · #5 |
| The thing is I just bought a new Rebel, and I am just not satisfied with the lens that it comes with (18-55mm canon) I have been shooting weddings for a local studio, and I have been using a Sigma wide angle lens, but it costs up in the $500-$600 dollar range, which I cannot afford right now. I am looking for an affordable versatile lens until I can afford to upgrade to something like that. Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 05:00:47 PM · #6 |
| this store is in my town , it is a very good store , with the lens you get what you pay for , |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 05:04:15 PM · #7 |
| So are you saying that it would be a pretty good buy for now, or in the lines of, you get what you pay for, as in for that price not to expect much. Forgive me I am still pretty new to the aspects of the SLR's. |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 05:06:57 PM · #8 |
| Unless you need a long lens, check out the Sigma 18-125. It's a great lens for "only" $250; much better than the kit lens. Then later when you get some $$$ you can pick up a Canon 70-200/F4L ($560), and a Canon 10-22 USM ($700), and you'll have a good set of lenses, good range without too much overlap. |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 05:20:48 PM · #9 |
| I would get a canon 50mm 1.8 and a sigma 105 2.8 two very good lenses at a affordable price |
|
|
|
01/11/2005 05:23:50 PM · #10 |
The price for the 2 sigma lenses looks very good to me but then they would because in the UK we pay nearly twice as much for our gear.
I have the sigma 18-125mm which rarely leaves my camera and is sharper than the kit lens and an unbeatable range.
|
|
|
|
01/11/2005 06:39:54 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by radiman:
The thing is I just bought a new Rebel, and I am just not satisfied with the lens that it comes with (18-55mm canon) I have been shooting weddings for a local studio, and I have been using a Sigma wide angle lens, but it costs up in the $500-$600 dollar range, which I cannot afford right now. I am looking for an affordable versatile lens until I can afford to upgrade to something like that. Any suggestions? |
If it's focal length range fits your needs, consider the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di. I've used it for some sports action type shooting and it seems as sharp as my Canon 85mm 1.8. B&H sells it for about $330 after Tamron's $40 rebate offer which is good thru 4/31 I think. |
|
|
|
01/12/2005 01:49:39 PM · #12 |
Could anyone please tell me if a Canon EOS fit Sigma 70-300 f4- 5.6 acro zoom will fit a canon EOS 300D.
And also what is the difference between this lens and a Sigma 28-300 f3.5--6.3 Macro hyperzoom. |
|
|
|
01/12/2005 01:58:18 PM · #13 |
the 18-50 f3.5-5.6 is crap,worst than Canon kit lens.
Here are 2 good lenses to start with:
Sigma 24-60
Sigma 24-70
Message edited by author 2005-01-12 14:06:03. |
|
|
|
01/12/2005 04:30:55 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by chig:
Could anyone please tell me if a Canon EOS fit Sigma 70-300 f4- 5.6 acro zoom will fit a canon EOS 300D. |
Yes, it should work fine.
Originally posted by chig:
And also what is the difference between this lens and a Sigma 28-300 f3.5--6.3 Macro hyperzoom. |
I'm not familiar with these but to answer in general terms- the second one has a wider zoom range which makes it more vesatile, it also has a wider aperture at the wide end of it's zoom range, 3.5 compared to 4, and is labelled Macro so it probably is able to focus on much closer subjects than the first. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
01/12/2005 04:56:34 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by TLL061:
this store is in my town , it is a very good store , with the lens you get what you pay for , |
It is a very good store. I just purchased two Sigma lenses from them via eBay for my 300-D and have not been disappointed. |
|
|
|
01/12/2005 07:58:26 PM · #16 |
The most used lens in my arsenal is a 85mm 1.2 portrait lens. This is one of the most expensive lenses I have and may be out of your price range.
Any way, the 85mm 1.8 and the 100mm 2 are both very good portrait lenses that are within your price range.
I know you are looking at zooms, but I just thought I would throw a few new ideas your way. I know more than a few portrait and wedding photographers who rely solely on primes. If you would like an example of how they work go to the Portraits page of my wedsite. All but three of those images were taken with the 85mm.
Message edited by author 2005-01-12 20:00:07.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/18/2025 08:07:50 AM EDT.
