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

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Damn, I want a new lens (again)
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 12 of 12, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/01/2006 04:25:48 PM · #1
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Originally posted by bood:
Yeah, buy it man.
It's sure to make you a much better photographer.


it will allow me to get images i can't get now, or to shoot at a lower ISO so the images I get look better. It should also give me more in-focus shots for more keepers, sharper shots for better enlargement.

Sometimes you need greater DOF, and you're shooting at f/4 or f/5.6 or so even if you have a faster lens. That's where IS helps. (Think of a school play or similar--poorly lit stage, kids all over the place, you can't move too far from your seat....)
 11/01/2006 02:58:20 PM · #2
If you can carry one lens instead of two ... and it's better quality ...
GO GO GO!!!!
(ps: I may not have a Canon but I usually have an opinion :)
 11/01/2006 02:46:50 PM · #3
Originally posted by dwterry:
Just curious.... in your opinion, what does the Canon 17-55 2.8 offer you that you don't already have with the Sigma 18-50 2.8? Is it just the IS or is there more to it?

I have the Canon 17-85 IS. I do wish it was a 2.8 lens - that is the primary reason I don't use it very much. Instead I use the Canon 24-70 2.8 a whole lot more, primarily for the 2.8 aperture. The IS on the 17-85 really doesn't buy me much of anything because at those focal lengths, I can pretty much hand-hold any exposure with or without IS.


dwterry - keep in mind that the 17-55 2.8 IS is an EF-S lens. It will not work on the 5D. The 20D and the 300D will work with it.'

Just FYI
 11/01/2006 02:27:03 PM · #4
Originally posted by bood:
Yeah, buy it man.
It's sure to make you a much better photographer.


it will allow me to get images i can't get now, or to shoot at a lower ISO so the images I get look better. It should also give me more in-focus shots for more keepers, sharper shots for better enlargement.
 11/01/2006 02:25:14 PM · #5
Originally posted by dwterry:
Just curious.... in your opinion, what does the Canon 17-55 2.8 offer you that you don't already have with the Sigma 18-50 2.8? Is it just the IS or is there more to it?

I have the Canon 17-85 IS. I do wish it was a 2.8 lens - that is the primary reason I don't use it very much. Instead I use the Canon 24-70 2.8 a whole lot more, primarily for the 2.8 aperture. The IS on the 17-85 really doesn't buy me much of anything because at those focal lengths, I can pretty much hand-hold any exposure with or without IS.


That was my thought, then I bough the canon 10-22 (my most expensive lens to date and second most expensive single thing i've bought after the 30D)

I've been using the sigma 18-50 for 18 or 20 months now. I know this lens, and it's shortcomings. For it's price class it's a good lens.

the 17-55 IS...usm is one benefit (faster better focus you can tweak) and the IS...I handlheld at 55mm a 1/4 second shot and got a sharp image. On my sigma I might, maybe, get that at 1/30. 1/4 is 3 stops slower and that is a significant difference IMO. And I'd bet the image quality is better - will that matter most of the time? No, but if it makes all my images even 2% or 5% better than my competition's then I get more work and make more money.

I'll have to see how my xmas pet season goes this month. If I can pull in more than $1500 I may do the upgrade.
 10/31/2006 10:28:46 PM · #6
Yeah, buy it man.
It's sure to make you a much better photographer.
 10/31/2006 10:25:51 PM · #7
Just curious.... in your opinion, what does the Canon 17-55 2.8 offer you that you don't already have with the Sigma 18-50 2.8? Is it just the IS or is there more to it?

I have the Canon 17-85 IS. I do wish it was a 2.8 lens - that is the primary reason I don't use it very much. Instead I use the Canon 24-70 2.8 a whole lot more, primarily for the 2.8 aperture. The IS on the 17-85 really doesn't buy me much of anything because at those focal lengths, I can pretty much hand-hold any exposure with or without IS.
10/31/2006 10:22:57 PM · #8
I've read that it takes great pictures but has a big problem being a dust magnet. Has Canon done anything to improve that?
 10/31/2006 10:00:03 PM · #9
They're not talking you down, BTW, they want you to jump!

JUMP! JUMP! JUMP!
 10/31/2006 09:40:59 PM · #10
Dream page..
 10/31/2006 09:39:27 PM · #11
buy it...get rid of those 2 lenses and get the one you want.

I am all for spending money on lenses.
 10/31/2006 09:37:03 PM · #12
I got to spend some time at a canon booth at a trade show. I got to play with some lenses. I want one. I've spent too much lately. I need help.

I want the 17-55 2.8 IS. It's only $1039. That's what, 1039 wendy's something or another's, right?

I can sell my tamron 28-75 and sigma 18-50 2.8 and be 2/3 of the way there.

Talk me down off the ledge, please.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 03:52:54 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 04/25/2024 03:52:54 PM EDT.