| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/03/2006 09:09:53 PM · #1 |
| I promised myself a gift for my birthday - just have a week left to choose which one: Sigma Zoome Wide Angle-Telephoto 28-70mm f/2.8 (D) EX DG, Sigma Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 (D) Aspherical IF, Tokina 24-200mm f/3.5-5.6 AT-X 242AF, or the Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF Macro? I already have a 18-50mm so I don't need a super wide and a 70-200mm zoom telephoto, so I need something in between. A f/2.8 aperature also seems appealing. Should I go for a lense that could replace my 70-200mm (e.g., a 24-200mm), or should I just something like the Sigma 28-70mm with a fixed f/2.8? What do you think? Is there anyone that you would stay away from or strongly suggest? |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 09:17:16 PM · #2 |
What's your main focus when you are shooting? Landscape, portrait, candid, macros, sports. etc?
Difficult to recommend a single lens/lese without much details.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 09:41:19 PM · #3 |
I'm an amature, so I shoot whatever is in front of me. Generally ... social gatherings, children playing, urban life.
Originally posted by faidoi:
What's your main focus when you are shooting? Landscape, portrait, candid, macros, sports. etc?
Difficult to recommend a single lens/lese without much details. |
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 09:44:26 PM · #4 |
sounds like you could use something really long. perhaps the 28-300? I use my longest lenses to catch the children playing without being so close, so that they don't notice me and get "hammy" or self concious. And for Urban Life you can't beat a good zoom. I don't know much about that lens in particular, but it seems like you could use some extra reach.
drake |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:36:16 PM · #5 |
I'd recommend a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for general purpose shooting since you already have a 18-50.
|
|
|
|
02/03/2006 10:55:28 PM · #6 |
| How about a prime like 85mm f/1.4 For portraits. |
|
|
|
02/03/2006 11:10:41 PM · #7 |
I know that I wasn't too crazy about the Tammy 28-300mm 3.5-6.3 Canon Mount as it was just too soft on the long end for my liking... Now you have IS on your 7D so I imagine it would help clear it up a bit.
Seeing that you have a 70-200 and an 18-50, I would be tempted to tell you to go with the 28-70mm 2.8 so you have a fast walk about lens in your kit... you'd be suprised how much time it will spend on the cam. I also have to believe that the 28-70mm would be a bit sharper than your 18-50mm (assuming it is a kit lens).
My bud at work has the 7D and one lens that I see him using quite a bit is the Tamron SP 90mm XR Di macro. Have you thought of something like that for your kit? It is an awesome portrait/macro and is amazingly cheap.
ED: The 90mm is a 2.8 1:1 macro
Message edited by author 2006-02-03 23:13:50. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 12:15:01 AM · #8 |
| I've been lokingat the Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF as well, maybe someone can explain this detail to me. Product description states, "a high maximum magnification of 1:2.9." What does this actually mean? |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 12:27:15 AM · #9 |
The Superzooms (28-200 or 28-300) are convenient for times when you want to travel and need as little equipment as possible, but optically they are not as good as other lenses - they tend to be a lot softer, particularly at the telephoto end. I have a 28-200 but don't tend to use it much any more unless taking multiple lenses is really going to be a problem. I would certainly recommend against ditching your 70-200 for the 28-200.
I'd think the 24-70 with constant f-2.8 would be quite nice! Another option would be to go for a prime lens - the 85mm f-1.4 thegrandwazoo recommended, or a 50mm f-1.4, or a 200mm or 300mm prime that would be faster than your existing lenses and the ones you're considering? Or you could complement your current range with a super-wide, something in the 10-20mm range?
Edit: I have a friend who owns a Tamron 24-135 and is exceedingly pleased with it. I don't know how the Sigma compares.
Message edited by author 2006-02-04 00:28:41. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 02:06:35 AM · #10 |
| Heartily recommend the Tamron 28-75 2.8 - if in doubt trust Bear-Music's call. It's a damn fine lens. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 02:33:14 AM · #11 |
| Have to agree with Paul Gatt - tamron 28-75 f2.8.....cheap, versatile and very good. |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 08:52:47 AM · #12 |
Thank you everyone... I think I have narrowed it down to two choices: the Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical or the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 (D) EX DG. The only noticeable difference is the magnification (1:3.9 on the Tamron vs 1:4.4 on the Sigma) and the the weight (Tamron is a tab heavier).
Apart from that, the choice will now also be based on price (Tamron is $360, after a $30 rebate, vs Sigma's $310) - I could get a filter set with the $50 difference.
Any final opinions from anyone before I jump? |
|
|
|
02/04/2006 08:52:49 AM · #13 |
Thank you everyone... I think I have narrowed it down to two choices: the Tamron AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical or the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 (D) EX DG. The only noticeable difference is the magnification (1:3.9 on the Tamron vs 1:4.4 on the Sigma) and the the weight (Tamron is a tab heavier).
Apart from that, the choice will now also be based on price (Tamron is $360, after a $30 rebate, vs Sigma's $310) - I could get a filter set with the $50 difference.
Any final opinions from anyone before I jump? |
|
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: 04/16/2024 05:24:48 PM EDT.
