Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 59
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24

    Post

    A new contender can also be the new Tokina 16-50 f2.8. Its CA is of the correctable kind in for instance Adobe Camera RAW for PS CS2/3 (not so with the Tamron, whose CA is more of the smear across the spectrum kind), and its build quality is very good. It also is very sharp.
    My budget is really not big enough to contain that Tokina 16-50mm F/2.8 zoom lens.

    I would only be able to afford that Tokina lens above if I get the Canon EOS 400D D-SLR camera body instead.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24

    Question

    Personal observation - Canon lenses work better than 3rd party lenses. They're sharper, faster to focus, more accurate with focussing and generally better built. You get what you pay for. Pay pennies get a lens that looks like it;s made from a coke bottle. Pay more and get a Canon lens. Their USM focussing is very good.
    Which Canon lens would you recommend me?

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Ben777 View Post
    Which Canon lens would you recommend me?
    if you are baulking at the cost of the sigma over the tamron then i think its safe to say that there is no canon lens near the price range you are looking at which is optically better than the sigma. or build quality for that matter.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    if you are baulking at the cost of the sigma over the tamron then i think its safe to say that there is no canon lens near the price range you are looking at which is optically better than the sigma. or build quality for that matter.
    Thanks!

    Nevertheless, I can afford to get the Canon 17-40mm USM F/4L zoom lens if I get the Canon EOS 400D D-SLR camera body instead.

    All the best.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    Rhys' remarks about being better built, and sharper, are not founded on anything.

    The Sigma EX and Tokina are better built than not-high end lenses from Nikon and Canon.

    The only two lenses from Canon that rival/top the 3rd party offerings optically and in build quality are much more expensive... the EF 17-40 f4L USM and the EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM.
    The same goes for Nikon with the AF-S 17-55 f2.8 DX.

    So, whether you choose a Canon EOS 30D or a Nikon D80, a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC macro or Tokina 16-50 f2.8 DX will be fine choices to fit your budget and purpose.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Ben777 View Post
    Thanks!

    Nevertheless, I can afford to get the Canon 17-40mm USM F/4L zoom lens if I get the Canon EOS 400D D-SLR camera body instead.

    All the best.
    nothing wrong with that choice. bodies come and go. glass is forever.

    if you have a photo assignment on the 22nd i'd be seriously thinking about getting this cam very soon. there is a period of adjustment you need to make in order to get the best results from whatever set up you get. no amount of money or quality equipment will make up for inexperience and lack of familiarity with the camera and its settings.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24

    Post No doubt indeed; have to be really soon...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    nothing wrong with that choice. bodies come and go. glass is forever.

    if you have a photo assignment on the 22nd i'd be seriously thinking about getting this cam very soon. there is a period of adjustment you need to make in order to get the best results from whatever set up you get. no amount of money or quality equipment will make up for inexperience and lack of familiarity with the camera and its settings.
    One question;

    How robust or durable is the Canon EOS 400D? (Considering that it is certainly going to be experiencing a lot of wear and tear out in the unfriendly field; you know...) :P

    The L lens would be a very nice, solid, and durable lens I know; it would be the one to keep.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    My 350D has proven itself to be very durable, it gets tossed into non-camera bags all the time, it has seen some rain, it has seen melting snow.
    Cameras like the Nikon D80 and Canon 400D/XTi may not have a metal alloy housing like a D200 and 30D, but they sure are durable.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    24

    Post That is good to hear.

    Quote Originally Posted by coldrain View Post
    My 350D has proven itself to be very durable, it gets tossed into non-camera bags all the time, it has seen some rain, it has seen melting snow.
    Cameras like the Nikon D80 and Canon 400D/XTi may not have a metal alloy housing like a D200 and 30D, but they sure are durable.
    I will seriously take a look at the Canon EOS 400D then...

    I am only concerned about the Canon 17-40mm USM F/4L zoom lens;

    This Canon zoom lens seems to be a "Subset" of the Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 EX DC macro zoom lens...

    I know that the build quality/design quality of the Canon L lens is certainly superior with a rubber sealed mount, powerful ring type USM motor, and full frame capability etc...But of all that might matters, the Sigma lens might just be good enough in build quality/design quality, focusing speed; not to mention that it is a whole F stop faster with a slightly longer zoom range too...

    What do you think about the optical quality of the Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 EX DC macro versus the optical quality of the Canon 17-40mm USM F/4L?
    Last edited by Ben777; 07-12-2007 at 08:32 AM.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    The Canon is actually really weather sealed. So if you put it on an 1D, you can put the combination into the streaming rain without any worry. It is not just a rubber ring at the lens mount.

    What is the big plus of the 17-40 is the USM, which makes it focus silent and fast.

    The Sigma is sharper, and the lenses are similar in size and weight.

    Of course, at the wider end you will almost never want to use f2.8. That depth of field is just not useful at the wide end.
    The extra 40-50mm range if the Sigma will get to be useful with for instance portraits, where also the f2.8 starts to be useful.

    All in all, both lenses have their virtues, and I can not tell you which one would be the best choice.
    I think I would prefer the Canon's operation, and the Sigma's optics. But I can only tell for certain if I would be able to use both lenses.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •