If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS
I own 3 Canon lenses,
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM. Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the lens I'm considering as my walk around lens. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=350973&is=REG also considering... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=284399&is=REG Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be appreciated, as well as any other serious recommendations. TIA John |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Digi - Reb" wrote in message news:XK21e.23986$b_6.15448@trnddc01... I own 3 Canon lenses, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM. Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the lens I'm considering as my walk around lens. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=350973&is=REG also considering... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=284399&is=REG Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be appreciated, as well as any other serious recommendations. TIA John If you can put up with a focus motor you can hear and one which is a triffle slower than a Canon USM and you can handle the occasional miss focus. You don't mind a Apochromatic lens producing chromatic aberrations on some scenes. The Sigma is a product worth considering. I just sold one of these (non macro) lenses after owning it for less than 6 months. Watch the line wrap!! http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....e=STRK:MESO:IT There is no difference in the sharpness of the image this lens and my new 24~70 f2.8 L series produces under circumstances ideal to the Sigma lens. There is lots of difference in other areas and I really don't mind having sold 2, Sigma lenses to get one "L" series of this type. I found the 28~70 f2.8 Sigma I had on my 10D to be better than the new Sigma for Digitals. If you care to take some advise from a previous owner... Try the 28~70 before making a decission. Douglas |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I own 3 Canon lenses,
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 that came w/ Digital Rebel EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 V USM that came w/EOS Elan II EF 75-300 f/4-5.6 III USM. Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is the lens I'm considering as my walk around lens. I personally like the 18-55 as a walk-around: Not because of quality (it's obviously not stellar), but because going as wide as 18mm is often very helpful to me - even though it isn't terribly "fast". Unless you don't find that to be so, you might want to wait until you can scratch up enough for: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...=351548&is=USA In fact, that lens would make the 18-55 useless, meaning you could sell it on ebay, making the cost difference between that and the Sigma not very great. steve |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 01:17:43 GMT, Digi - Reb wrote:
Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is = the lens I'm considering as my walk around lens. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai= ls&Q=3D&sku=3D350973&is=3DREG also considering... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai= ls&Q=3D&sku=3D284399&is=3DREG These links just take me to the B&H front page, I'm afraid. Probably because of the quoted-(un)printable encoding. It would be better if you posted your message as regular text rather than multipart MIME with text and HTML. Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be = appreciated, as well as any other serious recommendations. Assuming we're talking about 20-something to 70-something f/2.8 zooms ... Photozone.de disparages the Sigma 24-70 and talks up the Tamron 28-75. Doesn't provide much detail though. Follow this link and look at "Alternatives", underneath the table: http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/canonFAQ.htm#28L They don't mention the Tokina 28-70, another competitor in this range. -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
From: "Ben Rosengart"
| On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 01:17:43 GMT, Digi - Reb wrote: Since "quality" Canon glass is somewhat out of my price range this is = the lens I'm considering as my walk around lens. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai= ls&Q=3D&sku=3D350973&is=3DREG also considering... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ist&A=3Ddetai= ls&Q=3D&sku=3D284399&is=3DREG | | These links just take me to the B&H front page, I'm afraid. | Probably because of the quoted-(un)printable encoding. It would | be better if you posted your message as regular text rather than | multipart MIME with text and HTML. | Any thoughts or user testimonials, both pro and con would be = appreciated, as well as any other serious recommendations. | | Assuming we're talking about 20-something to 70-something f/2.8 zooms ... | | Photozone.de disparages the Sigma 24-70 and talks up the Tamron 28-75. | Doesn't provide much detail though. Follow this link and look at | "Alternatives", underneath the table: | | http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/canonFAQ.htm#28L | | They don't mention the Tokina 28-70, another competitor in this range. | | -- | Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 | Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those | questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. | --Josh Micah Marshall Those URLs are fine but are wrapped. You can't just click on them becuase they are incomplete. Just copy them and the line below them into notepad, unwrap them, copy the full URL and past into the Browser line. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:12:05 GMT, David H. Lipman
wrote: Those URLs are fine but are wrapped. You can't just click on them becuase they are incomplete. No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway. -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
From: "Ben Rosengart"
| No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding | applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway. | | -- | Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 | Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those | questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. | --Josh Micah Marshall Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-) -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"David H. Lipman" wrote in message news:jWl1e.25744$b_6.2980@trnddc01... From: "Ben Rosengart" | No sir, that is not the issue. It's the quoted-printable encoding | applied by the O.P.'s newsreader. Thank you anyway. | Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-) -- Dave You waste your time dave. If there is one person you could find more dissagable than a Linux user it just has to be a BSD user. NetBSD at that! This guy uses an oddball (to be kind) reader and expects it to recognise advanced, non-complying (because it is advanced) features of a modern day news reader. When it won't, he blames not his historic reader but the one with features all the rest of us are used to having. It's one thing to use an alternative operating system but another thing alltogether to expect it to be as advanced as a bought one. For years users of Unix like operating systems have predicted the imminent demise of Microsoft as the dominant OS. Maybe if the 'ix developers ever did agree on one point and make it seem possible, the next point would be in disagreement and the whole thing fall over again. SLRN is hardly a leading edge package. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:14:42 +1000, Douglas wrote:
You waste your time dave. If there is one person you could find more dissagable than a Linux user it just has to be a BSD user. NetBSD at that! It's true, don't try to sag me. NetBSD isn't my choice, that's what my ISP (and employer) runs. I'm posting from their machine. This guy uses an oddball (to be kind) reader Tsk, it would really be better if you weren't so snotty. -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 23:06:55 GMT, David H. Lipman
wrote: Then blame your News Reader -- slrn/0.9.8.0 (NetBSD) ;-) No. There's no good reason to post anything but text/plain to a non-binary newsgroup. -- Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215 Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing. --Josh Micah Marshall |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro for Nikon | Cynicor | Digital Photography | 0 | February 14th 05 08:23 PM |
Tamron Macro Lens questions | Peter Werner | 35mm Photo Equipment | 11 | September 8th 04 09:34 PM |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | W Chan | Digital Photography | 5 | July 22nd 04 03:05 PM |
My Sigma camera and lens collection | Giorgio Preddio | Digital Photography | 65 | July 7th 04 10:03 PM |
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 1:1 EX Macro Lens for Minolta Maxxum on eBay | Fred A. Miller | Photographing Nature | 0 | March 9th 04 06:29 AM |