Options
Need Advice: Lenses & Flash
I'm currently looking to add some lenses to my invetory this year and have looked around at various options and have decided to get two lenses and an additional flash unit.
My options I have narrowed myself down to are:
1. Canon 17-55mm f2.8 USM vs. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
2. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM vs. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM
3. Canon Speedlite 580EX II vs. No alternate found yet.
Although budget is always a factor in my decision I would prefer to pay for quality and get fewer lenses rather than getting average quality and more lenses. Basically I don;t want to regret my investment.
So my questions are:
Cheers/Peter
My options I have narrowed myself down to are:
1. Canon 17-55mm f2.8 USM vs. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
2. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM vs. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM
3. Canon Speedlite 580EX II vs. No alternate found yet.
Although budget is always a factor in my decision I would prefer to pay for quality and get fewer lenses rather than getting average quality and more lenses. Basically I don;t want to regret my investment.
So my questions are:
- Are the Canon lenses I mentioned really superior in image quality that the Sigma lenses?
- Is the price difference between Canon and Sigma worth the extra quality?
- Is there any other flash unit you would recommend instead of the 580EX II?
- Canon 30D
- Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
- Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
- Canon Speedlite 420EX
Cheers/Peter
0
Comments
For option 2 I would think there wouldn't be that much if any of a difference. I've used the F4 non IS and a sigma 100-300 and wouldn't really say that one was better than the other as far as image quality.
As for the flash I have the 580 I and plan on adding the 580II this year so I think you've made a good choice here.
Eric
It's better to be hated for who you are than to be loved for who you're not.
http://photosbyeric.smugmug.com
As for your options.
1. Canon 17-55mm f2.8 USM vs. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
The Canon is a nice lens with a really nice AF and IS that third parties don't offer. What I don't like about the lens is the size, high cost, and lack of hood. If optics is your main thing, I'd recommend a Tamron 17-50mm. As sharp as any other lens I've used in the past. It's build feel is like a consumer grade lens. Then again, so is the price. If you want can live with the slightly slower AF, lack of FTM, and lack of IS for about $400 in return, it's a great lens to get. They are both 17mm but the Tammy is actually wider. Sigma is not as wide and optically not as good from review on photozone.de, but it can focus a bit closer though. Another lens is the Tokina 16-50mm f2.8. It's wider than the others and build more robust than even the Canon. It's AF isn't as nice as the Canon though, but it does come with a hood, excellent center pinch lens cap, and "only" costs about $650.
2. Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM vs. Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG.
Sigma is coming up with a Mark II version of the macro version to make the optics at the long end better. I'd go for that. Main reason isn't optics, although the Canon may be slightly better. On a 30D, f2.8 or faster lenses focus faster, speed is better for me as it allows for faster shutter speed to freeze motion, give a brighter viewfinder, and get a shallower dof. The closer min. focus distance will make the sigma more versatile as well. Having said all that, if you can live with a prime, I'd get the 135mm f2L. It's optics is one of the best in the current Canon line up. I went from a Canon 70-200 f2.8 to this lens and I'm so much happier with the lighter, faster, and smaller prime. Plus it's black, as I hate big white lenses.
3. Canon Speedlite 580EX II vs. No alternate found yet.
Depends, what do you want from the flash that your 420EX can't do? If it's reach or faster recycle or ability to plug it into a power pack then get it. If not, I'm not sure you'd get much for the money spent.
As for your questions
Good luck.
What really makes the difference for me is the IS. Some short time ago, I read that IS on short focal lengths didn't make much difference. So, I was wondering if I had squandered some $400 to get the IS. I did tests with this lens, just in the back yard taking pictures of things at the focusing distance I typically use the lens both with and without the IS turned on, at some slower shutter speeds (1/15, 1/30 for example).
Analysis of the resulting images (more than just a couple, BTW) showed, in my hands, the IS really does make a difference and that I was able to realize 1 - 2 stops difference. For me, shooting weddings and receptions where light is not usually in abundance, this made a difference. And, yes, I know that IS doesn't stop motion.
For the flash question - I have the 580EX, the 580EX II, and the Sigma 500 DG Super. There are two major differences between the Canon Speedlights and the Sigma flash:
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Here's a photo of my 17-55 with its hood.
I like the lens. Good stuff. I like the IS. I miss the reach of the 17-85 more than I thought. Great walking around lens, though a hunk of glass.
FWIW
I am now within a couple of months of purchasing the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS because I am convinced, partly due to Scott_Quier and a couple of other shooters here who have demonstrated the high qualities of this lens and how it would apply in a wedding and event situation. The Tamron SP 17-50mm, f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) is a very suitable alternative if you don't need the IS of the Canon.
I have 2 copies of the Sigma EF-500 DG Super E-TTL II Shoe Mount Flash for Canon EOS. They are very comparable in featues to the Canon 580 EX, except that the Canon flashes are more powerful, more durable, a better autofocus assist light, easier to use and allow for an external battery pack for faster recycling. The Canon 580 EX/EX II are also very much more expensive than the Sigma units (almost twice as expensive).
The Sigma flashes are very competent and I use them professionally. I am still trying to find more information about the Sigma 530 Super flashes, but they are so new not much is available. They do have a bit more power, but otherwise they appear to be similar to the Sigma 500 Super flashes.
Some Sigma flash examples in the following thread, and most were shot with the Sigma 18-50mm, f/2.8 EX DC lens as well:
http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=711091&postcount=11
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
its hard for me to suggest anything other than f/2.8 with the 70-200 that has anything to do with movement or desired bokeh
and i would never suggest anything other than IS for anything handheld period.
clear as mud.:D ?
Thanks for all your advice and input.
Many of you have asked what are you going to photograph so I asked myself the same question and didn't come up with much in ways on area I would focus on. Although I have been using cameras for many years, it has only been in the last year that I became serious about my photography - a bit of a mid-life crisis kind of thing
If I had to choose three things I like to photograph they would be:
1. People - portraits, weddings, candid, dance
2. Flowers
3. Abstract
I know what I don't want to photograph:
1. Buildings
2. Landscape (not as a main interest anyway)
3. Wildlife - although small insects are fun (Macro lens in on my wish list for 2009)
Flash wise - I am looking for two things:
1. A second flash - to be more creative with lighting
2. A stronger flash - I bounce flash of walls and ceiling a lot to get diffused light. I also use it heavily in the day time as the light here in the Philippines is very strong during the day and it helps lighten shadows etc.
Why the f4 and not the f2.8 for the 70-200mm - I read some reviews about the 70-200 f2.8 and read that the lens is soft wide open and becomes sharp at f4, whereas the f4 is sharp at f4. So I couldn't justify the extra money needed when it seems that I would be using the lens on f4 anyway. Anybody got any thoughts about that? Have I completely got it wrong?
Not sure if the above is helpful. I've participated in this year's LPS and have enjoyed being creative with the two lenses that I have, but there have been times when I would have loved to have one of the above lenses and the additional flash to get some good lighting.
Thanks again for your comments. Let me know if there is anything I should look out for.
My images | My blog | My free course
sharpness i dont know....everything looks good to me.....
its blur and OOF i hate.:D
but the f/2.8 will give smoother bokeh and not limit you in low light, or limit you in fast action....
if i had a choice between a f4 with IS, or a f2.8 without IS
i would not give up the IS.
and that goes double if im doing handheld portrait photog!
I've been playing with the Canon 70-200mm f4 IS (two actually) and f2.8 IS for the last couple of weeks. I had both on my Amazon wishlist, but my husband surprised me with the 2.8 for Christmas
Both lenses can produce beautiful, high quality photos. Yes, the 2.8 can be soft wide open, but that's not the only time. The f4 was more consistent in producing sharp results, maybe because of the newer IS system?
At first I thought the f4 had a small scratch, turned out it didn't, but by the time I discovered this another f4 had been sent. The 2nd f4 that I received did not produce clear results. I had read that it can sometimes take multiple tries to find a 70-200 that produces clear results with your particular camera body. Of course I had also read that it can take some skill/finesse to get those results, too. Luckily the first f4 worked well and produced great results, so I knew it wasn't me. Anyhow, just something to keep in mind when trying the new lens.
Long story short, I decided to keep the f4. For now it fits the bill, and I'm extremely pleased with the results!
Nikon D300
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D
[SIZE=-3]Mary Beth Glasmann Photography[/SIZE]
Nikon D300
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D
[SIZE=-3]Mary Beth Glasmann Photography[/SIZE]
1. People - portraits, weddings, candid, dance
2. Flowers
3. Abstract
I'd get a fast normal zoom for weddings and candid and a fast telephoto primes for portraits and dancing. Flowers are probably best shot with a macro of some sort as well as abstracts.