lenses (2 Viewers)

[La La]

I've had lots of fun with my 18-55 and 50 1.8 but there's only so much you can do and all I can think about now is getting new glass. I shoot with a D80 but I feel fiscally alienated when I look at Nikkor prices. I'm already pretty sure I'll be getting a Tokina 11-16 at some stage (thanks to good advice from RSJ) but with regard to the 70-200 2.8, what think ye about the Sigma? The price difference between it and the Nikkor (which I will never be able to afford. Ever. If I had that money I'd prefer to upgrade to a D700 before getting that lens on a D80 body) is a big factor for me. Of course I'd love the Nikkor but will I really be losing out much and making a bad investment with the Sigma? Has anyone ever shot with the Sigma? Thoughts/advice appreciated.

(It didn't help yesterday when I was shown the photographers' kit storage room.....we are talking thousands and thousands of dollars of equipment just sitting there...I held a 600mm worth several years' rent...amazing. Don't get me started on the D3s....omg).

 

[RSJ]

I had the sigma a few years back, the one before they put the macro on there. It honestly wasn't the sharpest tool in my bag (ho ho) and the auto focus was a bit hit and miss at low light, but i did get some decent shots with it and if your heart is set on a 70-200 2.8, i'd say go for it. I'm pretty sure mark used one aswell. The only thing i'd say is i pined for one for ages, eventually got it, and realised i would use it only once in a very blue moon - i basically wanted it cos i was convinced once you have a wide angle and your 50, you get a 70-200. Not in my case, i just don't take the kinds of pics you'd want it for, so before you splash out, have a good think about really why you're buying it. If it's to give you more options, think about whether it's an option you'll actually use.

 

[Space]

That's some solid advice. What do you want to do with the lens that you can't do already?

 

[Mormon Nailer]

I was talking the the NYT photographer at the festival I was at a couple of weekends ago - he was using the same 24MM 1.8 USM lens I was. No fancy L series or anything. I was surprised.

Also:
I have a 28-135 IS USM that I dropped. The optics are perfect but there is something which intermittently catches the zoom mechanism and the autofocus is slightly tempermental.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28-135mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Anyone who feels they can give it a good home drop me a PM.

 

[La La]

I had the sigma a few years back, the one before they put the macro on there. It honestly wasn't the sharpest tool in my bag (ho ho) and the auto focus was a bit hit and miss at low light, but i did get some decent shots with it and if your heart is set on a 70-200 2.8, i'd say go for it. I'm pretty sure mark used one aswell. The only thing i'd say is i pined for one for ages, eventually got it, and realised i would use it only once in a very blue moon - i basically wanted it cos i was convinced once you have a wide angle and your 50, you get a 70-200. Not in my case, i just don't take the kinds of pics you'd want it for, so before you splash out, have a good think about really why you're buying it. If it's to give you more options, think about whether it's an option you'll actually use.

that is good advice, and I will take your points into consideration. I feel I've let myself become something of a one-trick pony - even one of the photo editors was like 'you need to put your 50 in a drawer for a while and use something else'. and I agree!
As I become more serious about pursuing (what I hope will eventually be a career in) news photography and having been out on assignments where you sometimes can't get close enough to capture that emotion with a kit lens, that's where I feel it's a great lens to have.

That's some solid advice. What do you want to do with the lens that you can't do already?

see above. it'd be nice to shoot within a 70-200 range.
apparently it doesn't have VR though, which would explain the price difference.

 

[magicbastarder]

herself has the sigma 70-300 macro; APO version. she's very happy with it, does exactly what it says on the tin.
sounds as if you're looking for length more than anything else, and it's a cheap enough way of getting it.

 

[Janer]

Why I chose Canon over Nikon, sure Nikon and Canon swap positions to claim best Camera but Nikkor lens prices and especially the long lens are massive in comparison to Canon.
If Nikon brought out a super Camera tomorrow I still wouldn't swap, lens are very important.
Thats my fan boy 2c!

 

[RSJ]

I'm actually seriously considering switching to canon for this reason, and the fact that the canon fixed lenses have a great reputation quality wise. Having come from a pentax film background, i put a lot of stock in the compatability of older nikon lenses with newer cameras as opposed to canon (or at least how it had been explained to me) but i'm starting to realise all the nikon system has going for it is the flash system (which i don't use mainly) and some serious brand loyalty. Most likely, once i can afford to swap, it'll come down to the high ISO performance (and it seems to me nikon is out in front at the moment in this regards, though i'm open to correction on this) but with a big slant to the canon side as, frankly, they seem to be better for lenses and predominantly the professionals choice.

 

[Janer]

Nikon are fractionally ahead in high ISO performance, but we're talking professionals here, you and I probably couldn't tell the difference.

 

[sarah]

Anyone any thoughts one this lens? http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09090107tamron17mm50mm.asp

I want a wide angle lens as I'm heading off to mongolia in June. I don't want to eat to much into my holiday
spends, and am also worried about sand ruining a fancy lens or me getting robbed en route.

this seems to have a nice range and am wondering whether it would suffice as an all rounder for the trip..
I currently have the 18 -35 kit and a nicer 50mm 1.4 prime which I love but just don't think it's
versatile enough..

Any thoughts appreciated.

 

[mel gibson]

I'm a huge Nikon fan,I sell cameras for a living and to me Canon aren't as nice to hold at all,I find the control layouts horrible too
that fucking wheel on the back of them feels awful!

 

[Janer]

Anyone any thoughts one this lens? http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09090107tamron17mm50mm.asp

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=308&sort=7&cat=43&page=1
For what you want this sounds perfect and it gets a pretty decent score and good reviews, it's also nice and small which has many advantahes of course referring to candid shots or robbery and also the weight of your Camera bag!

 

[sarah]

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=308&sort=7&cat=43&page=1
For what you want this sounds perfect and it gets a pretty decent score and good reviews, it's also nice and small which has many advantahes of course referring to candid shots or robbery and also the weight of your Camera bag!

thanks, that's what I was thinking the reviews sounded pretty good to me to for that price.

 

[La La]

That glass looks pretty nice sarah. Since I started this thread I've since bought - and fallen in love with - the Tokina 11-16 2.8. Total workhorse, great results, lots of bang for your buck. Love love love it.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Has anyone been looking at the 5D Mark II listing on Amazon lately.
There is something mad going on.
The normal prices are new 2500USD and used in good condition 2300USD +/- 100USD

But over the past few days different - very random - sellers have been listing them at very low prices - 1300 USD.

The appear and then disappear - it's all very suspect.