Issues, issues

Thusie · February 19, 2006

This is sort of a rant too. Don doesn't like the 17-85 IS, says it feels plasticy (is that a word?) geez. I went and checked some shots and he seems to hang in the 24-80 range. There isn't any place even sorta close to check out Sigmas, any idea on feel? Oh I'm sure he would just love the 24-105 L, need to get the bracket and handstrap for the reb already:wxwax I need to get this fixed up sort a soon. I should have never EVER let him touch the 20D, or the 70-200 and certainly NOT together.

Andy · February 19, 2006

Thusie wrote:

I should have never EVER let him touch the 20D, or the 70-200 and certainly NOT together.

Soooo, he can't touch your Mac, and now your camera. What CAN he touch

Thusie · February 19, 2006

Andy wrote:

Soooo, he can't touch your Mac, and now your camera. What CAN he touch

Geez Andy

Andy · February 19, 2006

Thusie wrote:

Geez Andy

I think that 17-85 EFS IS is a pretty fine lens... I got it for my wife to have on the 20D when she uses it...

pathfinder · February 19, 2006

Sounds like home.:):

Whenever I "loan" a piece of gear to Nightingale, I "know' I will either do without it in the future, or beg, borrow or steal a replacement for myself.

But look it this way, she is a great companion when I go out shooting and she wants to go along and join in the fun. So, that's a good thing, right??!!

ScottMcLeod · February 19, 2006

Andy wrote:

I think that 17-85 EFS IS is a pretty fine lens... I got it for my wife to have on the 20D when she uses it...

It's a good lens, but you do need to remember, the QC is kinda weak on it, and a lot of people notice they have soft(er?) copies than most.

Maybe it's the way the IS is configured though. Some people forget to turn it off in situations where you don't need it (and it could actually hurt the photo instead, such as on a tripod, for stationary shots)

That being said, I kinda want one... I want to do that EF-mod to one, so I can use it on my 10D.

EDIT: Oh, right. Thusie, Buy a 28-75 Tamron. You won't regret it.

mynakedsoda · February 19, 2006

Thusie wrote:

This is sort of a rant too. Don doesn't like the 17-85 IS, says it feels plasticy (is that a word?) geez. I went and checked some shots and he seems to hang in the 24-80 range. There isn't any place even sorta close to check out Sigmas, any idea on feel? Oh I'm sure he would just love the 24-105 L, need to get the bracket and handstrap for the reb already I need to get this fixed up sort a soon. I should have never EVER let him touch the 20D, or the 70-200 and certainly NOT together.

Keep in mind that I don't have the 17-85L so never directly compared them to the Sigma lenses. I did try the Sigma 24-60 2.8 EX and 24-70 2.8 EX in Nikon mount looking for a smaller (than my 17-55 2.8 Nikon) walkaround zoom that would cover my most used range (35-50mm). The 24-70 had much lower contrast and sharpness shot wide open compared to the 24-60. To me that's the whole point of spending more money (aside from the better VF view) for a constant 2.8 apeture zoom vs. a slower non-constant apeture. I ended up buying the 24-60 2.8 EX. Then eventually I got tired of it. It was Ok but paled in comparison to my cheapest (50mm 1.8D) prime even. I figured if the shot was important enough to take then it was important enough to use my best glass.

Does Canon not make a zoom that covers that range with better build quality? I noticed you said nothing about the optical performance so I'm assuming your husband is happy with it? I'd think real hard before buying a Sigma zoom in that range. Someone else suggested the Tamron 28-75. While the quality of that zoom is hardly questionable, I wonder if the range is suffecient. If he's shooting a fov crop DSLR then the difference in 24mm and 28mm is huge! It's actually noticeably huge (my opinion) even on a full frame body.

If his only nitpick is the build quality then my suggestion is to tell him to just live with it. Alot of lenses use plastic these days. It's just a fact of life. In many cases plastic is actually more durable and the better material vs. steel. My D100 bodies have had there share of bumps, knocks into walls, doors, ect. Not one dent or scratch on the polycarbonate shells. Try that with an old steel bodied SLR. Look at all the lensmounts and bodies being built out of plastics these days. How many people do you know that have ever wore out a lensmount or body though?

Thusie · February 19, 2006

Andy wrote:

I think that 17-85 EFS IS is a pretty fine lens... I got it for my wife to have on the 20D when she uses it...

I think it is a fine lens too. I used it a bit on the 20D which is probably the whole REAL issue. Every time he gets his hot little mits on the 20D all he talks about is what a fine camera it is. SO I'm probably whacking my head against a wall.

I think I'll pull a switch on him and slap the 17-40L on the reb and when he whines I'll have him:D

Thusie · February 19, 2006

pathfinder wrote:

Sounds like home.:):

But look it this way, she is a great companion when I go out shooting and she wants to go along and join in the fun. So, that's a good thing, right??!!

Yes it is, a very good thing:):

Thusie · February 19, 2006

Thanks all for talking this out with me, your a good bunch

Issues, issues

Comments