Lens considerations

mrcoons

I am considering a couple of different f/2.8 (or faster) lenses for use on my Rebel XT. Primary use will be indoors at concerts and outdoors at dusk. I'm not always able to get out on the field for marching band/football events so I will need something with a little reach to it. My price limit is $400 (US). Here is the list in order of my current ranking:


Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Autofocus Lens



Sigma Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Autofocus Lens


Canon Telephoto EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Autofocus Lens

Canon Telephoto EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Autofocus Lens


Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC






Anyone have any thoughts or comments? Any other lens that I should look at?

:scratch Thanks!

Andy

welcome to dgrin, mrcoons

of the lenses you mention, i only have experience with the canon 85 f/1.8. probably one of the best values in canon's lineup. well made, fast focusing, and a light-grabber at f/1/8. sharp wide open, and so sharp it'll cut you stopped down a bit. it's light and easy to handle, too. uses? indoors in larger venues (concerts, gymnasiums, etc). large studios for portraits - outdoors for portraits (it's an awesome portrait lens on a ff or 1.6x body - very flattering to your subject's features). i'm sure others can chime in on the other glass you mention... but i can't say enough about the 85 f/1.8

here's a couple from this lens:

(click pics for exif)

joss stone in concert (85 f/1.8 and 20d)


a confirmation event (85 f/1.8 and 20d)


just for fun (85 f/1.8 and 1Ds Mark II)


and a detail 100% crop - notice the ca performance!

mrcoons

Thanks Andy! I just recently started looking harder at the Canon 85 f/1.8 so your comments and photos were most timely. Loved your photos, I can certainly see why you like this lens. I'm particularly interested in the first photo as your subject is in a spotlight and I struggled with that sort of shot during jazz band season last year. Thanks for the input!

ziggy53

Mark,


You already have the 50mm f1.8, which is an equivalent to a 80mm on your camera (dRebel XT) and darned sharp to boot.

Andy's suggestion for the 85mm f1.8 equates to around a 135mm, and that's a pretty good reach for the money.

I have the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX and it's a wonderful interior lens, very suitable for weddings or events (birthdays, grads, any kind of reception or celebration.) It's not too valuable for sports and concerts.

You also have the Canon 75-300 IS. This is a very nice lens range for sporting events. You are right that's it's a bit slow, especially at the long range. If you stay on the sidelines or at least close in the stands, you can often stay in the 75-200 range and that keeps your lens in the faster f stops. Shoot only RAW and count on some noise reduction post-processing and you will find that ISO 1600, and even pushing to 1 stop under and then compensating in processing to give ISO 3200 equivalent, you can get some pretty good results.

I would recommend that you wait until you can spend around $1100 or so for the Canon EF 70-200 f2.8
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/ef_70200_28u
or at least around $800 for a Sigma equivalent.

Possibly even consider the Tokina AT-X 828 AF Pro 80-200mm f/2.8 SD at $600 or so.
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/tokina/atx_828_af_pro

Andy's suggestion for the 85mm is great if you want/need to buy something now.

ziggy53

ScottMcLeod

My vote would go with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD

... but I've never owned an 85 f/1.8 (oh how I would love an 85 f/1.8...)

My big question, why hasn't the Canon 70-200 F/4L come into the list?

Steve Cavigliano

Mrcoons,

Welcome to Dgrin

I have to agree with Andy that the 85mm F1.8 is an outstanding lens. Great for low light action and a very nice portrait lens. It focuses very fast and is pretty sharp wide open and really sharp one stop down.

I have the Tamron 28-75mm and it's also a very nice lens. Not quite as sharp wide open as the 85mm. The bigger issue, in my mind, is that the focus can be slow at lighting extremes. IOW, in low light it can hunt for focus lock and in really bright light (sunrises/sunsets) it can do the same. I like the color (a bit warmer than Canon lenses) and contrast of this lens. I also like the ability to zoom. Because it can cover 45-120mms on a 1.6X camera, it makes a really nice walkaround lens

Since the 85mm is one of the best low light action lenses available and since I shoot indoor sports I couldn't choose one of these lenses over the other They both do a fine job

I decided to add a pic taken with each lens. Here's the 85mm F1.8 at F1.8, ISO1600 and 1/400.


Here's the 28-75mm F2.8 Tamron @ F5.6, ISO400 and 1/2500 (I was on a rocking boat...lol) Converted from RAW with basically 0 sharpening.

Sorry I wasn't more help

Steve

ziggy53

ScottMcLeod wrote:

...
My big question, why hasn't the Canon 70-200 F/4L come into the list?

Mark said he wanted to go with f2.8 or better lenses in his original message. That said, the Canon 70-200 f4 is a very popular sports lens for sure.

ziggy53

Andy

just to be clear - i'm not promoting one lens over another - the o.p. asked about several lenses, i'm just reporting experience and results and usage of the 85 1.8 which i have experience with - have fun choosing

mereimage

See Andy-Bay---used Tameron for sell................I agree with Andy tho....Canon 85f1.8 is about as good as non L glass gets..........Mereimage

mrcoons

Scott, I have a question about your Tamron AF 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di Zoom, I have read a number of places where this lens is slow to focus and particularly in low light. Have you noticed this in your copy? As to your question about the Canon 70-200 F/4L it's just outside my budget right now. Maybe someday!:):

ziggy53

andy wrote:

just to be clear - i'm not promoting one lens over another - the o.p. asked about several lenses, i'm just reporting experience and results and usage of the 85 1.8 which i have experience with - have fun choosing

Andy,

Your images speak volumes about the quality of that lens. That superb quality does tend to promote the purchase of that particular lens. It's got me thinking anyway.

Best,

ziggy53

mrcoons

OK, I have narrowed my choices down to 2 lenses.

Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Autofocus Lens

or

Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 Aspherical IF

While I have heard a lot of good things about the Tamron lens I certainly like the additional reach of the Sigma. The review sites I have visited all rated the Tamron lens higher than the Sigma though, which makes my decision difficult.

(I'd still like to someday own a Canon 70-200 F/4L and a Canon 85mm. But for right now I don't think I can wait until I can budget the 70-200 (as I need a faster lens now) and the 85mm doesn't cover the areas I need.)

Any last comments on these 2 lenses?

Steve Cavigliano

mrcoons wrote:

OK, I have narrowed my choices down to 2 lenses.

Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Autofocus Lens

or

Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 Aspherical IF

While I have heard a lot of good things about the Tamron lens I certainly like the additional reach of the Sigma. The review sites I have visited all rated the Tamron lens higher than the Sigma though, which makes my decision difficult.

(I'd still like to someday own a Canon 70-200 F/4L and a Canon 85mm. But for right now I don't think I can wait until I can budget the 70-200 (as I need a faster lens now) and the 85mm doesn't cover the areas I need.)

Any last comments on these 2 lenses?

Mark,
I mentioned the 28-75mm Tamron's issue with bright light and low light. I have also seen it mentioned numerous times on other forums, so I don't think it's unique to my lens. Sounds like they all do it I would like to point out that it is only an issue at lighting extremes. But it can be a PITA if you're using this lens for sunrises/sunsets or ambient light shooting in poor light. Otherwise this lens is all I hoped it would be. Fairly sharp wide open and razor sharp from F4 on up. I like the warm color and the contrast is decent. I have zero regrets about purchasing this lens, especially at the price I paid for it

If you are considering the Canon 70-200mm F4, you might want to look into the Sigma 70-200 F2.8. Another really nice lens that can be purchased for less than $750.

Steve

mrcoons

I guess that's what worries me about this lens Steve. I am looking at using it at dusk on the practice field and at evening competitions (marching band). Then this winter at jazz concerts where I have to contend with subjects that are in the 'spotlight'! So I am not sure that this is the lens for me nor am I sure what is or if I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. Although I imagine that this lens would still work better for me than my Sigma F/3.5-5.6 lens is doing now.

Steve Cavigliano

mrcoons wrote:

I guess that's what worries me about this lens Steve. I am looking at using it at dusk on the practice field and at evening competitions (marching band). Then this winter at jazz concerts where I have to contend with subjects that are in the 'spotlight'! So I am not sure that this is the lens for me nor am I sure what is or if I'm looking for something that doesn't exist. Although I imagine that this lens would still work better for me than my Sigma F/3.5-5.6 lens is doing now.

Mark,
Dusk isn't an issue and spotlights shouldn't be either. The issue with sunsets/rises is that the AF hunts when there's too much Sun in the frame. Conversely, in poor light (not dusk, but indoors with really low light or outdoors at night, or maybe 30 minutes after sunset, with little or no additional light). The lens works just fine at dusk.

This shot of Andy shooting a new client (Mr. Cee Gull....lol) was shot just after the Sun went down. I used ISO1600 because I wanted the BG to be in focus also (I was shooting @ F8). No problem with AF lock or sharpness


Same thing with people in the spotlight at concerts. Nowhere near the brightness of the rising/setting Sun. So I don't think it will be an issue.

Steve

mrcoons

OK, here is an example of the sort of image I'm looking to improve with this lens. This image was shot with the Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC. This shot was taken at 7:06pm shortly after sunset on an overcast evening.

Here is the exif data:
Exposure time : 1/25
Exposure program: Normal
Exposure mode: Auto
Exposure bias [EV]: 0.0
F-Number: F5.6
Focal length [mm]: 125
ISO value: 1600
Shutter speed : 1/25
Aperture: F5.6
Flash: Not fired, compulsory flash mode, return light not detected
Metering mode: Multi-segment
White balance: Auto
Colour space: sRGB
Custom rendered: Normal
Subject program: Standard
Image width: 1728
Image height: 1152
Focus distance [m]: unknown (2)
Focus mode 2: AI servo
AF point: unknown (0)
Metering mode: Evaluative
White balance: Auto
Contrast: Normal
Sharpness: High
Saturation: High
Flash mode: Not fired
Flash intensity: 0
Flash: Not fired
Flash details: unknown (0)
Macro: Off
Digital zoom: Off
ISO value: unknown (32767)
Exposure mode: Program
Easy-Shooting: Manual

and the image:


I was able to make this image a little better with PSP-X but I try to not alter the image if I don't have to. Lazy I guess. So I guess the question is would the faster lens have made a difference here? Or is this just my poor photography skills?

(This image was the best of several different camera settings that I tried. Some of the shots taken full dark with just the parking lot lights were struggles too and I used the 50mm lens for those. Should have tried it at 7:00 and maybe I could have answered this question myself! )

Steve Cavigliano

mrcoons wrote:

OK, here is an example of the sort of image I'm looking to improve with this lens. This image was shot with the Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC. This shot was taken at 7:06pm shortly after sunset on an overcast evening.

Here is the exif data:
Exposure time : 1/25
Exposure program: Normal
Exposure mode: Auto
Exposure bias [EV]: 0.0
F-Number: F5.6
Focal length [mm]: 125
ISO value: 1600
Shutter speed : 1/25
Aperture: F5.6
Flash: Not fired, compulsory flash mode, return light not detected
Metering mode: Multi-segment
White balance: Auto
Colour space: sRGB
Custom rendered: Normal
Subject program: Standard
Image width: 1728
Image height: 1152
Focus distance [m]: unknown (2)
Focus mode 2: AI servo
AF point: unknown (0)
Metering mode: Evaluative
White balance: Auto
Contrast: Normal
Sharpness: High
Saturation: High
Flash mode: Not fired
Flash intensity: 0
Flash: Not fired
Flash details: unknown (0)
Macro: Off
Digital zoom: Off
ISO value: unknown (32767)
Exposure mode: Program
Easy-Shooting: Manual

and the image:


I was able to make this image a little better with PSP-X but I try to not alter the image if I don't have to. Lazy I guess. So I guess the question is would the faster lens have made a difference here? Or is this just my poor photography skills?

(This image was the best of several different camera settings that I tried. Some of the shots taken full dark with just the parking lot lights were struggles too and I used the 50mm lens for those. Should have tried it at 7:00 and maybe I could have answered this question myself! )

Mark,
I think the problem with this shot is the speed you were using. At 125mm's of zoom, a 1.6X FOV, and no IS a 1/25 speed would make it difficult to handhold and get sharp results. I think the 28-75mm would do better with this type of shot because you have the constant F2.8 aperture available. Wide open you would get 1/100 speeds for this scene. Also, even at full zoom you're only at 75mm's. So 1/100 should allow you to handhold with sharp results

And of course you should have taken the pic earlier We always think of those sort of things AFTER the fact.....

Steve

mrcoons

Thanks Steve, I'm convinced. I'll get the Tamron!

This picture was taken around 7:00pm CT and it was overcast, so what little light there was weird. I had tried the 'Cloudy' WB but the picture was even darker.

I'll quit bugging you and get that lens ordered!! Thanks for your assistance.

ziggy53

Mark,


I hope you don't mind, I played with your photo a bit. Tough lighting.

ziggy53

mrcoons

Here is my editted version of the original photo, using PSP X:

Guzzler

Please follow up with your choice of glass, when it gets in.

I to am stuck shooting in low light situations. Night clubs with really bad lighting trying to capture stand-up comics. I'm not allow to use a flash (really upsets the comics). Out of the thousands of shots taken I am not happy with any of them.

I have to bump up the ISO to the max (sucks because of the grain), or drop down the ISO a step or two, then get blurry shots because the comics really like to move around. To top it off, I am generally forced to the back of the room, so zoom is manditory.

I'm starting to think that I am stuck in a lose-lose situation.

mrcoons

I discovered last night that I can significantly improve my photos by setting a custom white balance. When I get some examples I'll post them, as I have not downloaded them from the camera yet.


My Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 should be delivered tomorrow and I'll have a football game Friday night.

mrcoons

With any of the preset WB settings I get pictures like this:



But when I set the Custom While Balance I get this:



Much better for my purposes. So if your camera allows a Custom WB read your manual to see how it's done and give it a try. Let me know how it goes.

mrcoons

I ended up getting the Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 and have used it once. Shot a couple of hundred pictures last night with it. If you are interested you can view them at http://mrcoons.smugmug.com/gallery/832651/1/37264679

mrcoons

Wow. They say "what goes around, comes around" and I found this post of mine while searching for information about a lens I am considering.

It pains me the time I've lost since I am now considering getting the EF 85mm that I probably should have gotten in the first place. Thanks once again to all of you who gave me all the great assistance back in 2005.

Live and learn.

ziggy53

mrcoons wrote:

Wow. They say "what goes around, comes around" and I found this post of mine while searching for information about a lens I am considering.

It pains me the time I've lost since I am now considering getting the EF 85mm that I probably should have gotten in the first place. Thanks once again to all of you who gave me all the great assistance back in 2005.

Live and learn.

You have to love the people here at Digital Grin.

Friendly and knowledgeable, understanding and evocative, ... and never boring!

Good luck with whatever you decide, but keep shooting and sharing,

ziggy53

mrcoons

I just ordered the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 lens like I should have done before. [FONT=&quot] :smack

Thanks folks!
[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]

pathfinder

Don't you just hate it when you come around to that kind of decision??:D

mrcoons

pathfinder wrote:

Don't you just hate it when you come around to that kind of decision??:D

I don't hate ordering a new lens, I just hate telling the wife about it!!!:beatwaxOh well, at least it will be quiet around here for a while!!!

wxwax

mrcoons wrote:

I don't hate ordering a new lens, I just hate telling the wife about it!!!:beatwaxOh well, at least it will be quiet around here for a while!!!

Pindy

So... how's that 2.8 been working out for your low-light endeavours?