Anybody want a Sigma 17-70? Seriously.
A bit hasty there, ignore me. 
Chat Forum
[closed]
Photography Q - Lens upgrade, worth it?
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
I'd agree with the comment about cropping to achieve the required image. For biking photos I want to share, I spend quite a bit of time cropping and manipulating the image to get the effect I'm after. The critical points then become making sure it's in focus (easier said than done) and the shutter speed is fast enough to avoid unwanted blurring.
I've a Nikon D90 which I use an 18-200mm lens, and add a 10.5mm fisheye when I want that effect. I've also started taking the big flashgun out with me too. Whilst that lot is quite heavy, I can ditch my tool kit on group rides so it's not too bad!Posted 2 years ago # -
PP - if your selling the 17-70, email me with a price as i'm on the lookout for one. Can i just add that buying a cheap canon 18-55 IS would be not much use because you can't use IS to stop action (which im guessing you'll want for MTB shots). IS only prevents camera shake with still subjects. Maybe the problem could be that the sigma 17-70 only has an f2.8 at 17mm? so when you zoom in to 70mm you're not getting enough light into the lens to stop the action? What with winter coming up and maybe being under trees and forests where its dark i would be looking at something with a mid zoom and a constant 2.8, and maybe an off camera flash as well.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I've got a 17-70mm 2.8 I must say that i've never found a problem with it's sharpness. It's within a gnatts whisker of being as sharp as my 70-200 F4L and my 50mm prime. Certainly once you've stopped down to 5.6 there is nothing in it...
That being said, that particular sigma model is a bit notorius for being of variable quality. I made sure I tested it in the shop before handing over the readys. Doesn't help you tho I guess!
Posted 2 years ago # -
If I could afford it I would buy some 2.8 or better lenses for my camera. I take low light music venues (pubs/clubs) and would love to have some faster lenses.
a sample of my stuff
http://www.flickr.com/photos/beaconrun/sets/72157621875477217/Posted 2 years ago # -
You can buy my Siggy 24-70mm for a couple of hundred quid, been thinking about buying something posh like a 24-105L for a while
Nice example, sharp and in good nick with constant f2.8 throughout the range
Posted 2 years ago # -
Personally I would never buy a superzoom as 18-200mm, also its only for 1.6x sensors? If you have any plans in the future to upgrade to full frame, would stick to EF lenses.
If you want sharpness, stick to prime lenses, maybe L range if you get a full frame body and a lot of spare cash
Posted 2 years ago # -
Now Peter is sorted, and we are on a bit of a lens love-in, has any body got (or know of) a Canon 100-400 thats for sale?
I've been looking for a while and haven't found one.
Cheers
Posted 2 years ago # -
I have a 100-400 and to be totally honest, it isnt worth the money, i would now buy a sigma 120-400 as it is as sharp as the Canon but about half the price, the only thing is my Canon 1.4 converter wouldn't work on it.
I also have the 70-200 2.8L IS and that is an outstanding lens in every sense!
Posted 2 years ago # -
The 70-300 IS USM is aparently an 'L' in disguise.
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/200-canon-ef-70-300mm-f4-56-usm-is-test-report--review?start=1
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
