Canon forces me to buy Sigma ;-)

Hi,

so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.

But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.

Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
(I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
and autofocus performance.

So, am I missing something?

(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s/efs-10d.html,
but I'm not that desperate, yet. :-)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:16:54 +0200, Marius Vollmer
wrote:

Hi,

so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.

But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.

Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
(I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
and autofocus performance.

So, am I missing something?

(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s/efs-10d.html,
but I'm not that desperate, yet. :-)

Only that little twitch at the corner of the eye that we all get when
the lens choice topic comes up. Don't worry, you'll have to soon too
grin.


Drifter
"I've been here, I've been there..."

"Marius Vollmer" a écrit dans le message de
...
Hi,

so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.

But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.

Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
(I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
and autofocus performance.

So, am I missing something?

Yes, you get what you pay for! Canon lenses are more expensive because they
just are that much better.

Jean


(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s/efs-10d.html,
but I'm not that desperate, yet. :-)

In article , Marius
Vollmer wrote:

So, am I missing something?

Yes...a clue. Sigma is crap.

Marius Vollmer wrote:
Hi,


(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s/efs-10d.html,
but I'm not that desperate, yet. :-)

I wouldn't call that 'desperation'. I'd call it 'About 30 minutes of
tinkering'.

The argument rages on about the quality of this lens, but I love mine.
I also love all that money that I didn't have to spend.

Marius Vollmer wrote:
Hi,


(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...s/efs-10d.html,
but I'm not that desperate, yet. :-)

I wouldn't call that 'desperation'. I'd call it 'About 30 minutes of
tinkering'.

The argument rages on about the quality of this lens, but I love mine.
I also love all that money that I didn't have to spend.

Yes, you get what you pay for! Canon lenses are more expensive because
they
just are that much better.


You think so? Besides the L series?

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

Yes, you get what you pay for! Canon lenses are more expensive because
they
just are that much better.


You think so? Besides the L series?

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

Yes...a clue. Sigma is crap.

You think so?
http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

Yes...a clue. Sigma is crap.

You think so?
http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html