| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/08/2004 01:35:46 PM · #1 |
Wide angel vs. Telephoto
Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 vs. Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L
Both good quality lenses but for the time being I can only afford one of them. Currently I´ve only one lens, Canon 24-85mm f/3,5-4,5 USM (average quality, all around).
Guess this is something I´ll have to figure out myself but if you have some input helping me decide then please post your comment.
Both are available for around $560-600 which is absolutly at the edge of my budged so please dont tell my to buy something more expensive.
Guess I would be using the wide angel more but I also would like to have the telephoto possibility besides an extension tube would give mr a better macro possibilities.
Another thing. Teleconverter vs. Extension tube
Teleconverter multiplies the focal length of you lens, that´s easely understood.
Extension tube increases the distance between the back of the lens and the sensor/film and thereby makes it possible to focus more closely (this can be understood to). But!, does this not have any effect of the focal length of the lens? (If so, how?)
Thx, Garlic
|
|
|
|
11/08/2004 01:58:02 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
11/08/2004 02:17:35 PM · #3 |
| I have a 28-200 (Nikon) lens that I found to be extremely versitile. Perhaps Canon makes a similar product. I would recommend a lens of that sort to you. Check this out. |
|
|
|
11/08/2004 02:29:56 PM · #4 |
Extension tubes have no effect on the focal length of the lens. They, as you said, simply allow you to focus closer than you normally would. They also keep you from being able to focus to infinity, but the purpose of extension tubes are not for long range shots.
|
|
|
|
11/08/2004 02:46:11 PM · #5 |
Everybody seems enamored with long lenses these days, but I think it's largely for bragging rights. In many situations you can move in closer rather than using a telephoto, but there are many cases when you cannot move further away. Your 24-85 works like a 39-135, so you are definitely missing what would be a traditional 28mm or 35mm wide. I'm not sure what type of photography you are doing, but if you are building a general purpose kit I would think about the wide angle side of things.
Message edited by author 2004-11-08 14:46:58.
|
|
|
|
11/08/2004 03:08:31 PM · #6 |
| I'm selling my sigma 15-30, it turned out to be a big disappointment. Flare on two shots out of 3, too heavy, too big, somewhat soapy pictures. Doesn't come close to the quality of nikon 18-35 for more money, and i shoot at 30 far more often than at 15. So right now, 24-120 does the job at 30 for me. |
|
|
|
11/08/2004 03:22:34 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Nusbaum:
Everybody seems enamored with long lenses these days, but I think it's largely for bragging rights. In many situations you can move in closer rather than using a telephoto, but there are many cases when you cannot move further away. Your 24-85 works like a 39-135, so you are definitely missing what would be a traditional 28mm or 35mm wide. I'm not sure what type of photography you are doing, but if you are building a general purpose kit I would think about the wide angle side of things. |
Thx Nusbaum. You´ve got a good point. Few month ago I decided that my next lens would be telephoto but I´m leaning very much in the wide angel direction. And I think it would fit my type of photography better. Still I will be missing the macro possibilities (solve that later).
Thx for your input jmsetzler.
Yurasocolov, sorry to hear about your disapointment. The Canon mounted lens gets very good reviews and the sample shots I´ve seen from it are sharp and good. To get a better wide angel you´ll have to put in another $100-200 and I simply can not afford it for a long time. About the flare, have you tried a bigger lens cap?
Thx all. More comment apreciated. |
|
|
|
11/08/2004 03:58:06 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Extension tubes have no effect on the focal length of the lens. They, as you said, simply allow you to focus closer than you normally would. They also keep you from being able to focus to infinity, but the purpose of extension tubes are not for long range shots. |
jmsetzler or someone else. You can find minimum focus distance and magnification for lenses but is it possible to calculate what effect extension tubes would have on this factors?
F.inst. Canon 50mm f/1.8 II have minimum FD 1.5' and magnification is 1:6.66. What would 12mm, 25mm or 36mm extension tubes do to thease factors? |
|
|
|
11/09/2004 10:53:15 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by garlic:
Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Extension tubes have no effect on the focal length of the lens. They, as you said, simply allow you to focus closer than you normally would. They also keep you from being able to focus to infinity, but the purpose of extension tubes are not for long range shots. |
jmsetzler or someone else. You can find minimum focus distance and magnification for lenses but is it possible to calculate what effect extension tubes would have on this factors?
F.inst. Canon 50mm f/1.8 II have minimum FD 1.5' and magnification is 1:6.66. What would 12mm, 25mm or 36mm extension tubes do to thease factors? |
It is usually more meaningful for macro stuff to talk about magnification than focal length. In terms of that
extension used/ focal length of lens = magnification
so 50mm extension, on a 50mm lens, gets you to around 1:1 |
|
|
|
11/09/2004 10:59:22 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Nusbaum:
In many situations you can move in closer rather than using a telephoto, but there are many cases when you cannot move further away. |
Moving closer or farther away to get a subject in the frame is also known as "sneaker zoom".
That said, there are just as many cases when you cannot move closer.
Also, another important consideration is the expansion or compression effect you get from shorter or longer focal lengths.
|
|
|
|
11/10/2004 08:22:44 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
It is usually more meaningful for macro stuff to talk about magnification than focal length. In terms of that
extension used/ focal length of lens = magnification
so 50mm extension, on a 50mm lens, gets you to around 1:1 |
Thx Gordon. I also went to the library yesterday and found some books about the physics behind lenses and light.
When you talk about extension used you have to have in mind the focal extension of the lens. I mentioned focal lenght in my former post but realy ment focal distance. Minimal focal distance is given for lenses and also of course the focal length (50mm for 50mm lens, 100mm for 100mm lens etc.) and magnification.
Thease factors are necesary to calculate the focal extension of lenses (for Canon 50mm f/2.5 (macro lens) it´s 25mm but for 50mm f/1.8 it is 7,5mm).
When using extension tubes you are making this focal extension larger (in parallel to the size of the tube) and therby making the minimal focus distance smaller.
When focusing into infinity the focal extension=0 and therefore extension tubes obviously makes it impossible to focus to infinity. |
|
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: 09/13/2025 07:05:04 PM EDT.
