Canon people...tell me about these lenses

[PhotobearSam]

Just wondering what is the good, the bad and the ugly. And if they are really bad, some other suggestions that have a larger range than 18-85 that will not bankrupt me, please.

http://cgi.ebay.com/SIGMA-18-200mm-Lens-Canon-EOS-30D-20D-5D-Rebel-XTi-XT_W0QQitemZ280114785401QQihZ018QQcategoryZ106844Q QrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sigma-18-125mm-f-3-5-5-6-for-Canon-Digital-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ150122700553QQihZ005QQcategoryZ30 066QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem



Also, I have 2 USM Canon EF lenses at home, 28-105mm and a 70-210mm, will they work on a Canon 30D and if so, what do they become equivalent to?

[ukcatfan]

Also, I have 2 USM Canon EF lenses at home, 28-105mm and a 70-210mm, will they work on a Canon 30D and if so, what do they become equivalent to?

Just multiply all focal lengths by 1.6.

Kevin

[Master Mason]

I have the Sigma 18-125. It is a very nice lens. Works great as a walk around lens with good lighting, but sufferes IMO in low light. I got it when I came back from WDW as I wanted a walk around that had more reach than the kit lens that I had at the time. It has served me well for that purpose.

However, I like to shoot in wider apetures, and it quickly climbs the ladder of the variable appeture.

I have not had the 18-200, but I have read it is soft especially at the longer focal lenghts. And I am sure it suffers from the same apeture problem as the 18-125.

I am in the process of replacing my lens to get the appeture I am looking for

So it depends on what your looking for and trying to do.

If it were me, I would get the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8, then your covered in that entire range with a 2.8 This is exactly what I have done in fact, I chose to go the canon route, but the sigmas have good reviews on those 2 lenses as well, at a significant cost savings. I opted for the more expesive canons, because I am sure I will be shooting with these 2 lenses for a very long time, so it was a good investment into what I want to do with my photography.

and yes your lenses will work as long as they are EF your good to go

[JR6ooo4]

Just wondering what is the good, the bad and the ugly. And if they are really bad, some other suggestions that have a larger range than 18-85 that will not bankrupt me, please.

http://cgi.ebay.com/SIGMA-18-200mm-Lens-Canon-EOS-30D-20D-5D-Rebel-XTi-XT_W0QQitemZ280114785401QQihZ018QQcategoryZ106844Q QrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sigma-18-125mm-f-3-5-5-6-for-Canon-Digital-SLR-Cameras_W0QQitemZ150122700553QQihZ005QQcategoryZ30 066QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem



Also, I have 2 USM Canon EF lenses at home, 28-105mm and a 70-210mm, will they work on a Canon 30D and if so, what do they become equivalent to?

I have read that the longer range you try to get in one lens the more you can loose image quality.

If you only have one camera then I would not worry about crop factor. A longer lens will get you closer.

Mikeeee

[handicap18]

The 2 Sigma lenses you gave the line for have been discontinued. They are good for what they are. The do lack the wide aperture on the long end and therefor will give some trouble with focusing at times.

Sigma is set to release, if they haven't already, a new version of the 18-200 that will have OS (Optical Stabilization, their version of IS). It will be higher priced, closer to $500, but will still be only f/6.3 at the long end. The OS will definately make a huge difference at the wide end for indoor non moving subject pictures or other night time shots that you need a slower shutter for.


Other than that it depends on what you want to give up. You can get some real good 17-55mm f/2.8's though Tamron (I believe Sigma has one as well, both are less expensive than Canon's), but they don't have the reach.

You have to decide what 2 things are most important to you and your photography habits: Longer reach, wider angle, wide aperture. Unfortunately no one makes a lens that incorperates all 3 (ie: an 18mm-105/125 or so f/2.8)

[PhotobearSam]

I am hoping for a walk-around lens that is equivalent to my 28-105 on my film camera.

I love my 28-105 so I would have to have at least a 18 to whatever as I really want that wide angle (I love shooting at 28mm in film...)

I was hoping for something I can take to Paris and not have to switch lenses a lot. I am very afraid of the Dust on the sensor thing.

I really used my 28-105 on my Elan and love it still.

I was looking at the canon 17-85. What do you all think of that one? I wish it was a tad longer.

[Master Mason]

kind of like one tells their customers, good, fast and cheap, pick 2 of the 3 huh?

[PhotobearSam]

Sigma is set to release, if they haven't already, a new version of the 18-200 that will have OS (Optical Stabilization, their version of IS). It will be higher priced, closer to $500, but will still be only f/6.3 at the long end. The OS will definately make a huge difference at the wide end for indoor non moving subject pictures or other night time shots that you need a slower shutter for.



That sounds interesting...

[Master Mason]

I am hoping for a walk-around lens that is equivalent to my 28-105 on my film camera.

I love my 28-105 so I would have to have at least a 18 to whatever as I really want that wide angle (I love shooting at 28mm in film...)

I was hoping for something I can take to Paris and not have to switch lenses a lot. I am very afraid of the Dust on the sensor thing.

I really used my 28-105 on my Elan and love it still.

I was looking at the canon 17-85. What do you all think of that one? I wish it was a tad longer.

What were the f/ values on your 28-105?

[PhotobearSam]

my 28-105 was an F 3.5-4.5...Paid about $529 for it in 1995...Still LOVE IT.

[handicap18]

I am hoping for a walk-around lens that is equivalent to my 28-105 on my film camera.

I love my 28-105 so I would have to have at least a 18 to whatever as I really want that wide angle (I love shooting at 28mm in film...)

I was hoping for something I can take to Paris and not have to switch lenses a lot. I am very afraid of the Dust on the sensor thing.

I really used my 28-105 on my Elan and love it still.

I was looking at the canon 17-85. What do you all think of that one? I wish it was a tad longer.

17-85mm on a Canon dSLR has the field of view of a 27-136mm on film. So actually it gives a longer field of view than your 28-105mm does.

[PhotobearSam]

Oh, I know but I was hoping for a tad bit longer as I did not want to have to bring a second Zoom lens to Europe as I will also be looking at a Superwide angle as well. I did not want to carry 3 lenses.

Does anyone use a teleconverter these days?:confused:

[jann1033]

you can get a kenko 1.4 teleconverter to use with f4 or better 100mm or longer lenses for under $200...sigma makes one but i think is only for f2.8 lenses and canon makes one for a select group of lenses, thinking mostly L...not sure what would happen if you used it with your 28 lens since it would be 4.5 by the time you got to 100..i think it can damage something or other.
you could get a tokina 12-24(I think they also have a 10-17) or 10-22 canon wide and have a decent range with 2 lenses and if you lens is sharp enough crop maybe for the extra length?
so your 105=168(?) your 210=336 on the 30d and yes you can use any ef on any eos

[Steve's Girl]

Well, one of the nice things about digital is that it is easy to crop if you don't have a lens that is quite as long as you would like. I would go with a better quality lens and plan to crop a little rather than a lens that may compromise the image quality.

[MarkBarbieri]

It's the age old tradeoff between range and quality. As a general rule, the more zoom range you get, the lower the IQ. That's certainly the case with these lenses compared with similarly built and price lenses of lesser range. Of course, the highest IQ lens in the world can't help you if it isn't the one on your camera when you're rushing to get the shot.

Some people love superzooms and others can't stand them. It's a personal style thing. I've never heard of anything that makes these lenses stand out as particularly good or bad examples of their breed. The only current superzoom that has a good IQ reputation is the Nikon 18-200VR. Canon tried a high end superzoom once (30-300 or something like that) but it didn't make many people happy.

you can get a kenko 1.4 teleconverter to use with f4 or better 100mm or longer lenses for under $200...sigma makes one but i think is only for f2.8 lenses and canon makes one for a select group of lenses, thinking mostly L...not sure what would happen if you used it with your 28 lens since it would be 4.5 by the time you got to 100..i think it can damage something or other.

I don't think it will cause damage (although I make no guarantees). It might not fit though, so don't force it. I think Canon's extender protrudes a bit, so it only works with telephoto lenses with a little space at the back. The other limit is on aperture. Canon xxxD and xxD cameras require f/5.6 to focus as well as Canon considers acceptable. So those cameras won't AF with an f/5.6 lens and an extender. Some third party lenses lie about the aperture so that the camera will still try to AF (although it won't do it well unless it's pretty bright). That doesn't affect exposure.

[handicap18]

Oh, I know but I was hoping for a tad bit longer as I did not want to have to bring a second Zoom lens to Europe as I will also be looking at a Superwide angle as well. I did not want to carry 3 lenses.

Does anyone use a teleconverter these days?:confused:

I've read a bunch of different post on different photo boards about what lens to use when traveling to Europe and the majoity of those that have been say they mostly use the wide stuff and the faster aperture stuff. Not many take long lenses.

Lots of indoor stuff and city scapes to photograph. Even when you get out into the country it would be landscapes. Not as much for telephoto or long zooms.

That being said, everyone has a different style to their photography.

When we eventually get to Europe I want to make sure I have a super wide lilke the 10-20mm and a fast aperture wide zoom like a 17-55 f/2.8 to go along with my 50mm 1.8 and 90mm f/2.8. I will probably take the long zoom, but don't see myself using it alot.

[jann1033]

looked it up on kenko..their tc are "designed " to work on 100 or above mm, work "best" on 200-300 but "may" work on down to 50mm.. smaller ap than f4 means the af won't work and you need to manual focus....so i guess the camera will not blow up or anything;) :)

[PhotobearSam]

Thanks guys...I appreciate the words of wisdom.