sigma 20mm f1.8

[suemccartin]

Hi All
I was wondering if anyone owns this lens in here? I need fast and wide angle for my original rebel. Canon doesn't seem to make anything this fast in this focal length range that I can find. I think even 24mm would be too much, what I'm doing is shooting karate available light at iso1600 and cleaning it up with noise ninja. My 50mm1.8 is great for the most part but for the close up stuff I need less magnification, if I can get enough light the 17 end of the 17-55 is great but it's too slow, I often can't get the shutter speeds I need to slow the action down. I know, I know I need to buy a 20D so I can use 3200 but I just can't do that kind of outlay right now. Thanks.

[TheObiJuan]

I have the lens and rarely shoot wide open. The lens is soft, but mine is a lil' softer than it is supposed normally be. I will send it to be recalibrated soon though. I like it a lot because it is built well, sharp enough past f/4, and gives me a wide enough fov on a 1.6.
The pictures, even at f/2 sharpen up very nicely, somtimes a 20, 20, 0 is all it takes to make it appear razor sharp, without any halos. Jeisner has the sigma 20 too, allthough his is sharper. :p

I am eagerly waiting for the release of the sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX as it should be sharper, optically faster, and of equal build. :D

[D70FAN]

Hi All
I was wondering if anyone owns this lens in here? I need fast and wide angle for my original rebel. Canon doesn't seem to make anything this fast in this focal length range that I can find. I think even 24mm would be too much, what I'm doing is shooting karate available light at iso1600 and cleaning it up with noise ninja. My 50mm1.8 is great for the most part but for the close up stuff I need less magnification, if I can get enough light the 17 end of the 17-55 is great but it's too slow, I often can't get the shutter speeds I need to slow the action down. I know, I know I need to buy a 20D so I can use 3200 but I just can't do that kind of outlay right now. Thanks.

In the short term you might want to "push" the exposure by -1EV (or more), to gain some shutter speed, and then recover the underexposure later in post processing. This has the effect of "pushing" the exposure value to ISO3200 (or higher) by underexposing. You will definately see more noise, but again with NN it should clean up nicely, and certainly no worse than the 20D at ISO3200. Make sure that you are using RAW for best results.

[TheObiJuan]

Also, shooting karate at 20mm is oftly close, are you certain that you need that field of view?
Are you trying to get both opponents, the mats, the cieling, and the audience in the pictures, or just the two opponents in action?

I have seen people shoot with the 85 f/1.8/ (f/1.2) and 135 f/2 for this type of photography.

[suemccartin]

In the short term you might want to "push" the exposure by -1EV (or more), to gain some shutter speed, and then recover the underexposure later in post processing. This has the effect of "pushing" the exposure value to ISO3200 (or higher) by underexposing. You will definately see more noise, but again with NN it should clean up nicely, and certainly no worse than the 20D at ISO3200. Make sure that you are using RAW for best results.

I've never shot in RAW, I was kind of under the impression that RAW files were a bunch bigger, you see I also need speed to keep up with the action. I generally cut the file quality down one notch in the menu so I can get 4 frames in the buffer. I don't know why but shooting in the gynasium under those sodium lights I have to boost exposure or all the faces come out dark if the subject is more than ten feet away--I'm convinced it's the lighting in there. I think my old G2 had MUCH fewer issues with the strange lighting in the gym using the built-in flash or my 380EX.

I shot available light for the first time this month and I'm still getting those horrid heavy yellow backgrounds, I left the camera on AWB, I think next time I'm going to try to setup a custom white balance and see if that helps any. It almost looks like it's mostly a yellow color reflection off the very shiny wood floor in the gym. I cut the saturation down to normal but maybe I need to go as low as possible with the saturation--that has helped in the past when I was shooting with flash.

Thanks for the suggestion about RAW, I'll look into that further, I have the extra memory cards but if the files are bigger it's not going to work because less will fit in the buffer and I'm already having a hard time with that on the Rebel (sigh I wish I'd saved up a little longer for the 20D now).

[suemccartin]

Also, shooting karate at 20mm is oftly close, are you certain that you need that field of view?
Are you trying to get both opponents, the mats, the cieling, and the audience in the pictures, or just the two opponents in action?

I have seen people shoot with the 85 f/1.8/ (f/1.2) and 135 f/2 for this type of photography.

At the gym where we always hold our demos and tests I sit on the floor in front of the bleachers and the action is about 15 feet in front of me--in most situations, the action would probably be farther towards the back of the gym--I'm not sure this is a "full sized" basketball court, it seems on the small side. My karate school always sets the action up close to the bleachers so the parents can see their kids and everyone feels more involved.

My 50mm 1.8 is too much lens for that close and my 17-55 is too dang slow as is my other 28-90. I need the field of view because they jump around like jumping beans and if I don't have a wide field I'll often miss the action--then I crop it creatively later. When I sit in the bleachers and shoot with flash I use my 28-135 IS which is a fantastic lens for this but frankly I'm tired of the heads in the shot when someone decides to move around while I'm trying to shoot.

If I can ever get the money together for a 580EX or even a 2nd 550 a slave setup might solve my flash speed issues but then I'm back to the mixed lighting problems again and even though no one's said a word about flashes in their eyes I'm always conscious of blinding somebody at the wrong time and getting somebody hurt as a result--it's much less intrusive to shoot available light.

[jeisner]

Jeisner has the sigma 20 too, allthough his is sharper. :p

;) as Juan suggests I am very happy with this lens, he is right though it is a little soft at f1.8 (although I find it acceptable) however even 0.2 difference (f2.0) sharpens up noticeably.. And no-one else makes a 20mm f1.8 to compete with it that I know of?

It is a little on the large/heavy side, but I actually like the size as it feels sturdy and strong. It is great for manual focus as large smooth focus ring and it can focus VERY close, which is handy for doing closeups if you don't want to change lens..

[suemccartin]

That's what I needed to know, sheesh this stuff is expensive these days, I thought 200 bucks for a lens was ridiculous 20 years ago, it's really ridiculous now at over 4 hundred bucks. I've been looking at the Pentax *istD entry so I could use my old Pentax K glass but with all I've got invested in the Canon stuff right now I'm still going for the 20D until others start using the Canon DIGIC sensor, it's the best I've seen compared to CCD sensors.

[Rhys]

That's what I needed to know, sheesh this stuff is expensive these days, I thought 200 bucks for a lens was ridiculous 20 years ago, it's really ridiculous now at over 4 hundred bucks. I've been looking at the Pentax *istD entry so I could use my old Pentax K glass but with all I've got invested in the Canon stuff right now I'm still going for the 20D until others start using the Canon DIGIC sensor, it's the best I've seen compared to CCD sensors.

In real terms - of course - camera lenses have never been cheaper. I know they took a 25% price jump in mid 1990 in Britain. Basically, I reckon the rate of inflation is about 5% per year - whatever government statistics (aka lies) say. This means prices should double every 15 years. Thus, a lens costing $400 after 20 years is really pretty good value. By year 20 it should be around $500.

[D70FAN]

That's what I needed to know, sheesh this stuff is expensive these days, I thought 200 bucks for a lens was ridiculous 20 years ago, it's really ridiculous now at over 4 hundred bucks. I've been looking at the Pentax *istD entry so I could use my old Pentax K glass but with all I've got invested in the Canon stuff right now I'm still going for the 20D until others start using the Canon DIGIC sensor, it's the best I've seen compared to CCD sensors.

Just to clarify:

Digic II is the Microprocessor/ASIC that runs the camera. The Sensor is a CMOS type. Nikons latest 12.2MP Pro camera (D2X) is now using a CMOS imager co-designed by Sony. This will probably continue to be the trend as CMOS is a lower cost process and can have some analog pre-processing control for noise and etc.

Just want to set the record straight. ;)

[TheObiJuan]

Mass produced cheap cmos sensors aren't too good, but when you throw some attention at them, like mico lenses, play with the pixel pitch, and fuss with heat transfer, then you can get some great chips.

[suemccartin]

Just to clarify:

Digic II is the Microprocessor/ASIC that runs the camera. The Sensor is a CMOS type. Nikons latest 12.2MP Pro camera (D2X) is now using a CMOS imager co-designed by Sony. This will probably continue to be the trend as CMOS is a lower cost process and can have some analog pre-processing control for noise and etc.

Just want to set the record straight. ;)

Thank you for that, I was under the misconception that it was actually a different sensor. Are you aware of anywhere that someone has put a *istD against a 20D and written a comparison review????? I'd really like to read that. I know the *istD doesn't have the 3200 iso mode but it would be awfully nice to use my old and expensive by today's terms pentax K glass.

[jeisner]

Thank you for that, I was under the misconception that it was actually a different sensor. Are you aware of anywhere that someone has put a *istD against a 20D and written a comparison review????? I'd really like to read that. I know the *istD doesn't have the 3200 iso mode but it would be awfully nice to use my old and expensive by today's terms pentax K glass.

If you have a collection of quality Pentax glass it would be a waste not to do it, the ist D s a capable camera that will work with all K mount glass ot there...

[suemccartin]

I noticed today browsing on amazon and another camera site that there is a 24mm 1.8. This might be marginally too much magnification but if it's a better lens (and over 70 bucks cheaper) it may be doable. Anyone have this one?

[suemccartin]

If you have a collection of quality Pentax glass it would be a waste not to do it, the ist D s a capable camera that will work with all K mount glass ot there...

While I can't say I've got a collection of quality glass they're decent and cost me plenty even 20 years agao--been sitting in the bag collecting dust. I've promised myself, pay off the credit cards and I'll treat myself to either an IstD or a 20D, I've heard there's a replacement for the 20D in the works, still attracted to the 3200iso mode the 20D has--need it for available light in the gym.

[jeisner]

While I can't say I've got a collection of quality glass they're decent and cost me plenty even 20 years agao--been sitting in the bag collecting dust. I've promised myself, pay off the credit cards and I'll treat myself to either an IstD or a 20D, I've heard there's a replacement for the 20D in the works, still attracted to the 3200iso mode the 20D has--need it for available light in the gym.

Hi suemccartin, the ist D & DS do have ISO 3200!!

This series was shot (not by me) with the ist DS handheld at ISO 3200, a few of them show camera shake as a very dark environment (that will show more noise) but all in all it is usable if you need it....

http://www.livejournal.com/users/sabotai/26941.html#cutid1

Personally I prefer 800 or 1600 and a bright lens, although that would be my preference with any camera to maximise image quality...

ISO 1600 sample: (from brett on dpreview)

http://www.pbase.com/shreder/image/40008323.jpg