DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> New lens advice, please!
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 17 of 17, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 10/09/2009 09:13:42 AM · #1
I've decided it's time to get a new lens to replace my kit lens (canon 18-55mm ef-s). My budget is around 400-500$. After searching the internet and reading all kind of reviews I narrowed down my choice to two lenses:

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC for Canon
Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Canon

I have to add that I will be used mostly for wedding photography.

Which one would you choose???
Thanks,
George
 10/09/2009 09:18:58 AM · #2
Assuming image quality and price are comparable... I like strong perspectives, so I'd go with the Tammy, as that extra 1mm of wide angle might often make a difference.
 10/09/2009 09:24:19 AM · #3
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Assuming image quality and price are comparable... I like strong perspectives, so I'd go with the Tammy, as that extra 1mm of wide angle might often make a difference.


Thanks Steve. That's 1-0 for Tamron so far...:)
 10/09/2009 09:32:15 AM · #4
Just ran into this relevant discussion on Flickr.

Another possibility to consider: I upgraded my own 18-55 kit lens that came with the Rebel XT to the newer version that comes with the Xs and XSi. Optics are way better and it is stabilized. Plus, you can buy one used for pretty cheap. I got mine from another DPC member who no longer used it, and it gave her the money to buy some plugins.

Message edited by author 2009-10-09 09:35:24.
 10/09/2009 09:48:20 AM · #5
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
Just ran into this relevant discussion on Flickr.

Another possibility to consider: I upgraded my own 18-55 kit lens that came with the Rebel XT to the newer version that comes with the Xs and XSi. Optics are way better and it is stabilized. Plus, you can buy one used for pretty cheap. I got mine from another DPC member who no longer used it, and it gave her the money to buy some plugins.

That's not a good option for me. I really need the f/2.8.
 10/09/2009 12:25:33 PM · #6
Tamron all the way. I had that before I got my 17-40L and it was a great lens. Noisy when it focuses but I understand they've brought out a USM equivalent.
 10/10/2009 03:10:05 AM · #7
while you search, keep an eye out for the canon 16-35mm 2.8 (first generation). I recently saw one go on craigslist for $450. at the very least, compare any lens you consider with this to decide how far from the best you are willing to go. The 17-40 would be a great choice over third-party lenses, too. I know you want f/2.8 but in this category of lenses i feel the image quality factor from Canon or Nikkor is much more important.
 10/10/2009 07:48:40 AM · #8
Originally posted by robshookphoto:
while you search, keep an eye out for the canon 16-35mm 2.8 (first generation). I recently saw one go on craigslist for $450. at the very least, compare any lens you consider with this to decide how far from the best you are willing to go. The 17-40 would be a great choice over third-party lenses, too. I know you want f/2.8 but in this category of lenses i feel the image quality factor from Canon or Nikkor is much more important.


Thanks for the input Robert. I know what you are saying quality wise but the Tamron has some great reviews unlike Sigma which is rather "bad". The main problem is that both the 16-35 and 17-40 are EF lenses so they would be affected by my camera crop factor and I really need an affordable wide/fast lens. So I guess I'll go with the Tamron after all. :P
 10/10/2009 08:11:06 AM · #9
both lenses tested here
 10/10/2009 08:13:41 AM · #10
Originally posted by Giorgio:
The main problem is that both the 16-35 and 17-40 are EF lenses so they would be affected by my camera crop factor and I really need an affordable wide/fast lens. So I guess I'll go with the Tamron after all. :P


All lenses are quoted at 35mm equiv so the 16-35 is 2mm and 1mm wider than both the Sigma 18-50mm and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

eta if you are looking for a 17mm ish lens (on 35mm terms) you need something like the tokina 11-16 f/2.8 or the sigma / canon 10-22 which are slower ~ f/3.5-4.6 IIRC

Message edited by author 2009-10-10 08:15:15.
 10/10/2009 09:01:51 AM · #11
Originally posted by bobonacus:
Originally posted by Giorgio:
The main problem is that both the 16-35 and 17-40 are EF lenses so they would be affected by my camera crop factor and I really need an affordable wide/fast lens. So I guess I'll go with the Tamron after all. :P


All lenses are quoted at 35mm equiv so the 16-35 is 2mm and 1mm wider than both the Sigma 18-50mm and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

eta if you are looking for a 17mm ish lens (on 35mm terms) you need something like the tokina 11-16 f/2.8 or the sigma / canon 10-22 which are slower ~ f/3.5-4.6 IIRC


To my knowing the 16-35mm on my 400D would actually be 25-56mm, but the tamron and sigma from what I've read are build for crop sensor cameras so they act like an EF-S lens.
 10/10/2009 09:04:47 AM · #12
Originally posted by Giorgio:
Originally posted by bobonacus:
Originally posted by Giorgio:
The main problem is that both the 16-35 and 17-40 are EF lenses so they would be affected by my camera crop factor and I really need an affordable wide/fast lens. So I guess I'll go with the Tamron after all. :P


All lenses are quoted at 35mm equiv so the 16-35 is 2mm and 1mm wider than both the Sigma 18-50mm and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

eta if you are looking for a 17mm ish lens (on 35mm terms) you need something like the tokina 11-16 f/2.8 or the sigma / canon 10-22 which are slower ~ f/3.5-4.6 IIRC


To my knowing the 16-35mm on my 400D would actually be 25-56mm, but the tamron and sigma from what I've read are build for crop sensor cameras so they act like an EF-S lens.


they are for crop sensors but still quoted in 35mm equiv so youstill need to multily by 1.6
 10/10/2009 09:14:19 AM · #13
Originally posted by bobonacus:
Originally posted by Giorgio:
Originally posted by bobonacus:
Originally posted by Giorgio:
The main problem is that both the 16-35 and 17-40 are EF lenses so they would be affected by my camera crop factor and I really need an affordable wide/fast lens. So I guess I'll go with the Tamron after all. :P


All lenses are quoted at 35mm equiv so the 16-35 is 2mm and 1mm wider than both the Sigma 18-50mm and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

eta if you are looking for a 17mm ish lens (on 35mm terms) you need something like the tokina 11-16 f/2.8 or the sigma / canon 10-22 which are slower ~ f/3.5-4.6 IIRC


To my knowing the 16-35mm on my 400D would actually be 25-56mm, but the tamron and sigma from what I've read are build for crop sensor cameras so they act like an EF-S lens.


they are for crop sensors but still quoted in 35mm equiv so youstill need to multily by 1.6


So you basicaly say that I should look for an EF-S lens to get the desired wide end?!
 10/10/2009 09:28:27 AM · #14
To make this all clear, someone told me that an EF-S lens is not affected by the crop factor... This may be stupid but I had this idea in my mind.
 10/10/2009 09:46:35 AM · #15
Originally posted by Giorgio:
To make this all clear, someone told me that an EF-S lens is not affected by the crop factor... This may be stupid but I had this idea in my mind.


An EF-S lens will only work on a crop sensor camera. The ratio remains the same - 1.6x
 10/10/2009 12:51:45 PM · #16
a lens designed for full frame performs BETTER on a cropped sensor camera. this is because a cropped camera literally crops the image, and this targets the "sweet spot" (center) of the lens. the weakest parts of a lens in terms of image quality are the edges, so a cropped camera takes advantage of a full-frame lens by cropping in and not using the edges of the circle projected by the lens.

the "mm" designation is constant for all lenses - aps, 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 4x5, 8x10, etc
This is because it is a measurement of focal length. basically these lenses all project a certain image circle, and the size of the recording medium (sensor, film) we use crops into that circle. (while a 50mm lens on a digital slr is "standard," it is a wide angle lens on a medium format camera. 90mm on 4x5 is wide angle.

Whoever said an ef-s lens is not affected by crop factor was misleading. the canon 10-22 ef-s lens on a rebel is exactly the same as a 16-35 on a 5d, because the rebel multiplies the focal length by 1.6.

Buying a full frame lens for use on a cropped sensor body will yield much better results than a lens designed for cropped sensors.
 10/10/2009 01:07:52 PM · #17
Just to reinforce what the others have said. The focal length stated is the actual focal length, whether it is an EF or EF-S lens. The EF-S simply has a smaller circle of view, as it does not need to cover a full 35mm frame. The only time the crop factor needs to come in to play is if you are wanting to know how the relative field of view compares when you move an EF lens from a full frame camera to an APS-C camera.

It is the camera it is mounted on that makes the difference. For example, A 50mm EF and a 50mm EF-S on an EOS-40D will have the same field of view and apparent amount of zoom. But, if you then put the 50mm EF on a full frame camera, you will appear to have a wider field of view, as you are using more of the image area.

Message edited by author 2009-10-10 13:08:11.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/25/2025 06:21:34 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 12/25/2025 06:21:34 PM EST.