Canon lenses

bwana said:
Any lens I buy today needs to be compatible with my next camera and the sigma, while impressive, is too slow for what I need and isnt designed to be used on a fullframe body.
Click to expand...

My quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek. But to counter your argument - right now you have to go back to do the job again because your kit is not giving you the right result. So you're losing time/money. Have you tried it with your 18-200?

bwana said:
I'm not sure, but I dont think a hood will help prevent an in picture light from flaring.
Click to expand...

I didn't realise it's in-picture. Yeah, lens hood will be of limited help there.
 
bwana said:
Any lens I buy today needs to be compatible with my next camera and the sigma, while impressive, is too slow for what I need and isn't designed to be used on a fullframe body.
Click to expand...

Well, that Sigma is a super wide angle lens for crop factor cameras. It's not what you need. It's for taking wide angle shots with EFS cameras. It does not solve your flaring problem.

BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly. If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!
 
ldmelsa said:
If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!
Click to expand...

Or just get it now, since bwana said it was at 18mm, so this lens will do the job already.
 
ldmelsa said:
BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly.
Click to expand...

That's somewhat of a generalisation. The 10-20 is at it's sharpest at f/5-5.6, which is wide open from around 14mm (f/4 at 10mm). Something else to keep in mind is that, at that short a focal length, infinity is pretty close. According to the DOF caluclator, 10mm at f/5.6 on a crop body gives you infinity from 1m away, and 1.4m at f/4. Given that it is rectilinear, I think it's a pretty good choice for jobs like this.

But as I said before, my quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek - I know bwana won't buy it. :D
 
koffiejunkie said:
My quip about the 10-20mm was tongue in cheek. But to counter your argument - right now you have to go back to do the job again because your kit is not giving you the right result. So you're losing time/money. Have you tried it with your 18-200?
Click to expand...
Sorry but your counter doesnt help my situation as I would still need to actually buy it and if I'm going to buy a lens it's going to be FF compatible. I really cant afford to buy a lens I (hopefully;)) wont be able to use within a year.

I dont have a 18-200 - rather a 28-300 (which will be useful in the future on a FF) which wasnt wide enough for the job. Fortunately I did manage to remove the flaring with some careful clone/healing work. :)
ldmelsa said:
Well, that Sigma is a super wide angle lens for crop factor cameras. It's not what you need. It's for taking wide angle shots with EFS cameras. It does not solve your flaring problem.

BTW - It's not to slow. It's a super wide angle lens. These lenses aren't that sharp at large apertures. Super wides are used at small apertures, mostly. If you really want a fast one, wait for your fullframe camera and get the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM. Version II has better corner sharpness. It's a great lens!!!
Click to expand...
I need a fast wide angle lens - so far my top two contenders are the 16-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70 f/2.8. I never have wanted another crop lens - though I did briefly consider the 17-55 f/2.8.
koffiejunkie said:
Or just get it now, since bwana said it was at 18mm, so this lens will do the job already.
Click to expand...
It will indeed . :)
 
Last edited:
koffiejunkie said:
That's somewhat of a generalisation. The 10-20 is at it's sharpest at f/5-5.6
Click to expand...

cool
I did not know that. Nice lens!
Best bang for buck EFS/DX super wide angle.
Maybe these EFS super wide lenses are sharper than FF ones at large apertures.
The Canon EF super wide lenses are sharper at f/11 than at f/4.
I have heard of this deference before. (EF/FX vs EFS/DX)
Maybe that's another advantage of crop factor.

Check this combo, hey?

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-200 VR
Sigma 10-20

:)
 
bwana said:
Sorry but your counter doesnt help my situation as I would still need to actually buy it and if I'm going to buy a lens it's going to be FF compatible.
Click to expand...

I've said *twice* now I mentioned the Sigma tongue-in-cheek. Geez.

bwana said:
I dont have a 18-200 - rather a 28-300
Click to expand...

Aah, my mistake.

bwana said:
so far my top two contenders are the 16-35 f/2.8 and the 24-70 f/2.8.
Click to expand...

I haven't tried the 16-35, but I damn near almost bought the 24-70 f/2.8. When I went shopping for my first lens I found a very nice second-hand copy for £500. If I knew how much they were new I would have bought it, but I was quite sold on the 24-105 f/4.

ldmelsa said:
cool
I did not know that. Nice lens!
Best bang for buck EFS/DX super wide angle.
Click to expand...

It's why I bought it. The Canon EF-S 10-22mm is (from what I've read) marginally better, and if feels a tiny little smoother (I tried it), but nowhere near enough to justify the price difference.


ldmelsa said:
Maybe these EFS super wide lenses are sharper than FF ones at large apertures. The Canon EF super wide lenses are sharper at f/11 than at f/4. I have heard of this deference before. (EF/FX vs EFS/DX)
Maybe that's another advantage of crop factor.
Click to expand...

It might be. You have more DOF on a crop body, which might very well result in a sharper image. It may be that the lens design just shifts the the sweet spot. I wonder how this would compare to whatever is considered ultra-wide on the Olympus body.

ldmelsa said:
Check this combo, hey?

Nikon D300
Nikon 18-200 VR
Sigma 10-20
Click to expand...

Looks like fun. If I didn't already buy the Canon + glass, I might have gotten the D300. I almost did, actually. It was just almost £400 more expensive at the time and I couldn't see it being worth the difference. If I was willing to spend that much more I would have added one or two hundred more and gotten the 5D...
 
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM - end of story.
 
bwana said:
EDIT - considered getting a lens hood from OutdoorPhoto but they want r60 for delivery! So before I do that (or support my local camera shop) I'm going to print one out and see if it helps. :)
Click to expand...
Didnt come out too bad - just have to test it now. :D

picture.php
 
mercurial said:
:eek: Are you serious? Did you make that yourself or did you get it on a great special?
Click to expand...
DIY jobby as per my earlier post. :)

. . . and I used card, hence the outrageous expense :D
 
mercurial said:
Wow, nice. I missed that earlier post.
Yeah that's an outrageous expense :D
Click to expand...
Considering what a local retailer wanted for the proper hood I thought it might be worth a shot to see if it made a difference.
 
So, what's the verdict then?

I forgot my hood for the 24-105 in a hotel, and they say they didn't find it (probably thought it was rubbish and threw it away). Replacement is £40-50 :eek:
 
koffiejunkie said:
So, what's the verdict then?

I forgot my hood for the 24-105 in a hotel, and they say they didn't find it (probably thought it was rubbish and threw it away). Replacement is £40-50 :eek:
Click to expand...
Well it looks cool but I haven't been able to field test it yet. I was planning to this afternoon but as it turns out I've managed to lose my remaining tripod mount so I'm be looking for a new one of those next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X