| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/31/2007 05:54:01 AM · #1 |
Hi guys,
I´m thinking in buy a new lense for my REBEL 30D. I´m looking for a definitely lense.
What do you think about this SIGMA lense? Do you think it´s a good investment? Thanks in advance
|
|
|
|
03/31/2007 05:55:42 AM · #2 |
| It's not a bad lens, the contrast and sharpness are pretty good. However, the AF is SLOW! |
|
|
|
03/31/2007 05:59:55 AM · #3 |
Originally posted by shalrath:
It's not a bad lens, the contrast and sharpness are pretty good. However, the AF is SLOW! |
And, what about some alternatives?
|
|
|
|
03/31/2007 09:57:45 AM · #4 |
The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 seems to be a very nice lens. But a bit more expensive also. And it's not so wide.
|
|
|
|
03/31/2007 01:07:21 PM · #5 |
| I'm not so sure if Canon offer anything similar to the Nikon 18-70mm, but if they do it would be well worth a look. |
|
|
|
04/02/2007 11:15:02 AM · #6 |
Hi Alexys,
I'm looking at the same class of lens for my 400D, as a replacement for the 18-55 kit. From what I can see, the 17-70 is looking like the winner for me. The zoom range down to 17 is very important for me for a walk-around lens, as I really like the wide capability. There are plenty of nice lenses 28-whatever, but I think these are designed for a good range on full-frame cameras, and I would find them limiting.
There are a few nice options for constant 2.8 lenses, but they tend to be in the 17-50 range, or the 28-80 range, so are more limited at either the long or the short end. If you are happy with the shorter range at one end or the other, then Canon, Sigma and Tamron make good constant 2.8 lenses in both classes.
The only close competitor to the 17-70 range the Canon 17-85 IS lens, which is about twice the price of the 17-70. Compare the reviews on these. The canon is not as good optically (slower, not as sharp), but has IS and a slightly bigger range. Then there's a few super-zooms from Sigma and Tamron, but they suffer optically, both with sharpness, and also max aperture through the range.
One thing I've found is that people say AF is slow. I've also found that generally this is not really a problem. Yes, if you focus at infinity, and then want to refocus close up, then it might take a second for a REALLY slow lens to refocus, but how often do you actually do this? When you're using an SLR, you use the half press a lot, even just to frame the shot, you'll prefocus. And if the focus is already close to the right point, then refocus will be fast. I've not noticed the kit lens being slow, and I don't think these other lenses are going to be slower. So, in my opinion, unless you are changing from far to near to far for sports photography, then it's probably not going to be an issue. For portraits or anything that you preframe, or a series of shots at around the same focus distance, it's going to be fine.
So, for me, at the price, the 17-70 looks very nice. It's a little slower at the long end that constant aperture options, so take this into consideration, but my solution will be to get a 50 1.8 for those few times when the long end speed is a real issue.
Disclaimer - I've not used these lenses outside the shop yet. I've read many many many reviews, and I'm just respouting my spin on what I've read. So, you can take my comments, or you can ignore them. :) |
|
|
|
04/02/2007 11:19:25 AM · #7 |
| A lens with its own focus motor makes a big difference to the experience. Day and night difference. Especially if it's your everyday lens. |
|
|
|
04/02/2007 11:26:00 AM · #8 |
I think a combo of the Tokina 12-24 and Tamron 28-75 would probably be ideal, especially if you're trying to go for landscape ability on the 17-40.
But for that price you might as well go for the 17-40L |
|
|
|
04/02/2007 11:48:48 AM · #9 |
|
|
|
04/03/2007 05:39:07 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by hsolakidis:
A lens with its own focus motor makes a big difference to the experience. Day and night difference. Especially if it's your everyday lens. |
Do any of the lenses we are talking about here not have their own focus motors? Not trying to discredit this valid point - I'm just checking. :) To my knowledge, only older lenses would not have their own motor. Certainly the 17-70 has a micromotor in it. |
|
|
|
04/03/2007 05:46:23 AM · #11 |
The best complete concise list of lenses and reviews I know of is www.photozone.de. You can see whats available, check out the reviews, then cross reference with B&H or any other online store to find out if the fantastic lens you've discovered is anywhere near you price range. :)
|
|
|
|
04/03/2007 05:47:27 AM · #12 |
Not necessarily. Many new lenses do not have their own motor and rely on the camera screw for focusing.
Nikon calls lenses with motors AF-S, canon USM. |
|
|
|
04/03/2007 06:37:20 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by hsolakidis:
Not necessarily. Many new lenses do not have their own motor and rely on the camera screw for focusing. Nikon calls lenses with motors AF-S, canon USM. |
Hmm, I can't speak for Nikon, but Canon's USM is not to specify that it has a motor, but instead, it is specifying a particular type of motor. Most non-USM lenses have dc micromotors in them, not no motor at all. USM motors are faster and quieter than micromotors, which is why they are nicer. 3rd party lenses have equivalents, Sigma has HSM. It means the same as Canon's USM.
What's the kit lens that comes with the D40? I'd be surprised if it was an AF-S lens.
|
|
|
|
04/03/2007 06:48:53 AM · #14 |
| i'm leaning towards this one ! |
|
|
|
04/03/2007 11:40:26 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by surfdabbler:
Originally posted by hsolakidis:
Not necessarily. Many new lenses do not have their own motor and rely on the camera screw for focusing. Nikon calls lenses with motors AF-S, canon USM. |
Hmm, I can't speak for Nikon, but Canon's USM is not to specify that it has a motor, but instead, it is specifying a particular type of motor. Most non-USM lenses have dc micromotors in them, not no motor at all. USM motors are faster and quieter than micromotors, which is why they are nicer. 3rd party lenses have equivalents, Sigma has HSM. It means the same as Canon's USM.
What's the kit lens that comes with the D40? I'd be surprised if it was an AF-S lens. |
All EF lenses contain their own focus motor, it's a decision Canon made back when they designed the mount. And as you say, "USM" (short for "UltraSonic Motor") indicates a particular kind of motor which is quieter and faster.
However, when Nikon first introduced AF they placed the motor in the body, with a mechanism in the lens mount to allow the body to drive the focus mechanism in the lens. This made lenses a bit cheaper and easier to make but caused some problems since the motor in the body is a fixed size and therefore can't be matched to the lens like on-lens motors can. Nikon subsequently introduced lenses which do have their own motor. These are called AF-I (with a "normal" motor) or AF-S (equivalent to Canon's USM).
With the D40, as a cost-cutting measure they removed the autofocus motor from the body. Hence, the D40 can only autofocus on lenses with their own motor (AF-I or AF-S).
And the D40 kit lens is indeed AF-S (AF-S DX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II).
splidge
|
|
|
|
04/03/2007 04:11:11 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
I think a combo of the Tokina 12-24 and Tamron 28-75 would probably be ideal, especially if you're trying to go for landscape ability on the 17-40.
But for that price you might as well go for the 17-40L |
I agree that a great combo would be the 12-24 + 28-75 and that is what I plan to do. I thought hard about the 17-40L but in the end I decided to go with two and get the wider range. The other thing about the 17-40L is the weight, it is big and heavy. |
|
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: 04/23/2024 09:06:21 PM EDT.
