I decided what I need - DPChallenge Forums

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/05/2006 10:51:57 PM · #1

Now I just need some assistance in starting my "homework" to decide what lenses to choose.

I have found that I really need a wider angle lens for my real estate shots. I want something that is good for indoor room shots, doesn't have to be particularly fast since I can bump the ISO on the Canon and this the room is of course stationary. What is a good range for getting good room shots without too much distortion? A bit of fisheye look is acceptable, but not too much.

I also really miss being able to focus getting really close in to a subject. My telephoto zoom says macro on it, but I cannot get it to focus on anything closer than about 4 feet away...and that's only when not zooming in. I want something I can get probably 12" or less away from and still be able to focus. Doesn't have to be a zoom...it can be a prime.

I'd really like to stay under $500 total for both lenses. Is this doable? I just would like a little help to know where to start in my search. Some ideas? Thanks very much!

Judy

strangeghost

Canon EOS-7D

08/05/2006 11:04:40 PM · #2

Tokina 12-24 is a good fit for your needs. I just purchased this lens within the last 2 months and love it.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

08/05/2006 11:16:03 PM · #3

For architectural interiors you want a lens that is rectilinear, with minimal barrel distortion, in the 10-12mm range. I'd steer you at the Canon 10-22mm EFS, but it won't mount on a 10D. From what I've heard, the Tokina works very well also. Something in this range will be just the ticket.

But this lens won't help you for closeups. You CAN focus quite close with the Canon 10-22, but it's so wide that the distortion is dramatic on close-in subjects. The Tamron 28-75mm works very well for close work:

Robt.

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF for Minolta

08/06/2006 12:25:08 AM · #4

Thanks for the suggestions.

How about the Sigma 28-80 f/3.5-5.6? It looks like it only runs about $100 and might provide the close up work I'm thinking about? Must be something about it that I'm missing for that price.

MrEd

Sony DSLR-A100

08/06/2006 12:32:43 AM · #5

Originally posted by jpochard:

It's not an EX. The EX 2.8 version would run you $290 at Sigma4Less.com. Though, I haven't seen any reviews on it.

Edited to add: Here ia a review on Fred Miranda.

Message edited by author 2006-08-06 00:34:44.

Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX Aspherical DG DF for Minolta

08/06/2006 12:44:39 AM · #6

THIS is the one I was looking at.

Do I have to have an "EX"? What is the difference?

MrEd

Sony DSLR-A100

08/06/2006 12:49:59 AM · #7

Read up on the Sigma lenses and wha the letters mean here.

faidoi

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

08/06/2006 01:03:24 AM · #8

Originally posted by jpochard:

THIS is the one I was looking at.

Do I have to have an "EX"? What is the difference?

Exterior looks. Looks like reeeeaaally tiny specks of glitter is probably the best description. I don't know if that is what gives it a matt/sand paper ish feeling or not. Better grip.

Message edited by author 2006-08-06 01:04:55.

colyla

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM II

08/06/2006 01:30:31 AM · #9

Originally posted by jpochard:

I have the Tamron 28-75 and I find it to be a bitch to take pictures inside (which is what I'm assuming you will for inside of homes). I also have the 18-55 kit lens (and I like it!) and it works the best for me on indoor shots (since I can get everything I want in the shot without standing on my head)....I'm thinking the 28-80 that you're looking at will not be wide enough for you....Bear mentioned that the 10-22 won't work on you 10D...maybe the 12-24 Tokina will that someone mentioned...plus it looks to be an awesome lens if you look at the photos done with it.

I love my tamron but have been contemplating the 17-85 for my walk-around just because I hate changing lenses. (I'm one of those that closes the car door, turns of the A/C, etc because I don't want to get crap inside the camera)

Message edited by author 2006-08-06 01:31:57.

Qiki

Fujifilm X100T

Pentax DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited

08/06/2006 01:37:52 AM · #10

Originally posted by faidoi:

Exterior looks. Looks like reeeeaaally tiny specks of glitter is probably the best description. I don't know if that is what gives it a matt/sand paper ish feeling or not. Better grip.

I'm pretty sure Sigma claim improved optical quality with the EX, not only superficial differences.

faidoi

Pentax K10D

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

08/06/2006 03:20:32 AM · #11

Originally posted by Qiki:

Originally posted by faidoi:

Exterior looks. Looks like reeeeaaally tiny specks of glitter is probably the best description. I don't know if that is what gives it a matt/sand paper ish feeling or not. Better grip.

I'm pretty sure Sigma claim improved optical quality with the EX, not only superficial differences.

Not sure, but it might be like have a lens white. Anytime you see a white lens you just assume it is the best.