Canon forces me to buy Sigma ;-)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Marius Vollmer, Oct 29, 2004.

  1. Hi,

    so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.

    But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.

    Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    and autofocus performance.

    So, am I missing something?

    (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)
     
    Marius Vollmer, Oct 29, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Marius Vollmer

    Drifter Guest

    On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:16:54 +0200, Marius Vollmer
    <> wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    >my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    >crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    >But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    >on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >
    >Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    >DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    >(I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    >a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    >the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    >EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    >and autofocus performance.
    >
    >So, am I missing something?
    >
    >(I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    >but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)


    Only that little twitch at the corner of the eye that we all get when
    the lens choice topic comes up. Don't worry, you'll have to soon too
    <grin>.


    Drifter
    "I've been here, I've been there..."
     
    Drifter, Oct 29, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Marius Vollmer

    jean Guest

    "Marius Vollmer" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    > Hi,
    >
    > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >
    > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > and autofocus performance.
    >
    > So, am I missing something?


    Yes, you get what you pay for! Canon lenses are more expensive because they
    just are that much better.

    Jean


    > (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)
     
    jean, Oct 29, 2004
    #3
  4. In article <-technik.uni-dortmund.de>, Marius
    Vollmer <> wrote:

    > So, am I missing something?


    Yes...a clue. Sigma is crap.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Oct 29, 2004
    #4
  5. Marius Vollmer

    Robert Barr Guest

    Marius Vollmer wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    >
    > (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)


    I wouldn't call that 'desperation'. I'd call it 'About 30 minutes of
    tinkering'.

    The argument rages on about the quality of this lens, but I love mine.
    I also love all that money that I didn't have to spend.
     
    Robert Barr, Oct 29, 2004
    #5
  6. Marius Vollmer

    Dps Guest

    >
    > Yes, you get what you pay for! Canon lenses are more expensive because

    they
    > just are that much better.
    >


    You think so? Besides the L series?

    http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html
     
    Dps, Oct 29, 2004
    #6
  7. Marius Vollmer

    Dps Guest

    Dps, Oct 29, 2004
    #7
  8. Marius Vollmer

    GT40 Guest

    On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:16:54 +0200, Marius Vollmer
    <> wrote:

    >Hi,
    >
    >so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    >my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    >crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    >But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    >on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.


    You mean the EF-S line?

    >
    >Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    >DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    >(I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    >a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    >the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    >EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    >and autofocus performance.


    I have a freind with the 10D and he just bought the 17-40 f/4L for it.
    He really likes it for indoor work.
     
    GT40, Oct 29, 2004
    #8
  9. In article <clthe5$1qk2$>, Dps <
    THIS*@deslab.ntua.gr> wrote:

    > > Yes...a clue. Sigma is crap.

    >
    > You think so?


    Sigma has always made mediocre hardware that is marketed to cheapskate
    amateurs that don't know the difference.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Oct 29, 2004
    #9
  10. In article <sFrgd.17755$>, Robert
    Barr <> wrote:

    > The argument rages on about the quality of this lens, but I love mine.
    > I also love all that money that I didn't have to spend.


    The sting of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low price
    is forgotten.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Oct 29, 2004
    #10
  11. Marius Vollmer

    Chuck Guest

    dont listen to all the morons in this newsgroup who hate sigma. Go read the
    Canon lens forum on dpreview.com. Everyone is happy with their Sigma.

    The only good lens Canon makes are the L serie. If you cant afford it, go
    with Sigma.


    "Marius Vollmer" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    > Hi,
    >
    > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >
    > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > and autofocus performance.
    >
    > So, am I missing something?
    >
    > (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)
     
    Chuck, Oct 29, 2004
    #11
  12. Marius Vollmer

    Dps Guest

    >
    > Sigma has always made mediocre hardware that is marketed to cheapskate
    > amateurs that don't know the difference.


    like the 50mm/2.8 for example? While canon only has L series lens? Like
    28-80 which "pro" canon users get with their SLR kits? Don't think I'm some
    Nikon freak, I have canon. I buy canon. I am no pro, I am an amateur and I
    rarely can buy L series. In this case, tamron, sigma and co offer
    substantially better lenses than canon at half the price.
     
    Dps, Oct 29, 2004
    #12
  13. Marius Vollmer

    Eric Gill Guest

    Marius Vollmer <> wrote in
    news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de:

    > Hi,
    >
    > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.


    Why? You knew that going in, or should have.

    > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > and autofocus performance.


    I wish I could tell you something about this. The 28-135 is a good
    performer, yeah, but I've also got the 16-35L, and it is so fast and quiet
    it's hard to tell anything has happened, i.e., damned near perfect.

    It wasn't, however, cheap in any sense.

    > So, am I missing something?


    I don't think so. The consensus seems to be that this lens is a great
    performer for the price, despite the knee-jerk anti-Sigma silliness in this
    thread. Truth is, Sigma *can* make some spectacular glass (my 70-200 is as
    close as you can get to perfect without IS/OS whatever you want to call
    it). They can also make absolute crap. You are entirely correct to shop for
    experience before buying.
     
    Eric Gill, Oct 29, 2004
    #13
  14. Marius Vollmer

    GT40 Guest

    On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:04:42 +0300, "Dps" <servis*REMOVE
    THIS*@deslab.ntua.gr> wrote:

    >>
    >> Sigma has always made mediocre hardware that is marketed to cheapskate
    >> amateurs that don't know the difference.

    >
    >like the 50mm/2.8 for example? While canon only has L series lens? Like
    >28-80 which "pro" canon users get with their SLR kits?


    Most "pros" dont buy kit lenses.
     
    GT40, Oct 29, 2004
    #14
  15. Marius Vollmer

    GT40 Guest

    The 17-40mm is an L lens

    On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:53:15 -0400, "Chuck" <nospam@no_spamm.com>
    wrote:

    >dont listen to all the morons in this newsgroup who hate sigma. Go read the
    >Canon lens forum on dpreview.com. Everyone is happy with their Sigma.
    >
    >The only good lens Canon makes are the L serie. If you cant afford it, go
    >with Sigma.
    >
    >
    >"Marius Vollmer" <> a écrit dans le message de
    >news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    >> my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    >> crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >>
    >> But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    >> on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >>
    >> Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    >> DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    >> (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    >> a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    >> the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    >> EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    >> and autofocus performance.
    >>
    >> So, am I missing something?
    >>
    >> (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    >> but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)

    >
     
    GT40, Oct 29, 2004
    #15
  16. Marius Vollmer

    BG250 Guest

    I have no problem with image quality. Any Sigma I've owned was very good.
    The problem is upgradeability. If you get a new Canon DSLR in the future,
    the lens may not work. You have to send it for a digital lobotomy. If the
    lens is so old, they may not be able to upgrade it. You could resell, but
    value on 3rd party lenses is not too great.
    bg

    "Marius Vollmer" <> wrote in message
    news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    > Hi,
    >
    > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >
    > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > and autofocus performance.
    >
    > So, am I missing something?
    >
    > (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)
     
    BG250, Oct 29, 2004
    #16
  17. Marius Vollmer

    Robert Barr Guest


    >
    > The sting of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low price
    > is forgotten.


    .... but is it worse than realizing that the emperor is naked? Worse
    than the sting of overpaying by a factor of 8 or more?
     
    Robert Barr, Oct 29, 2004
    #17
  18. Marius Vollmer

    Robert Barr Guest

    Robert Barr wrote:

    >
    >
    >>
    >> The sting of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low price
    >> is forgotten.

    >
    >
    > ... but is it worse than realizing that the emperor is naked? Worse
    > than the sting of overpaying by a factor of 8 or more?


    Yeah, that nasty little 18-55 does such a lousy job!

    http://www.cycleorings.com/House2b.jpg

    This is from an absolute amateur at processing, but I think it's
    acceptable. (The gutter is actually shaped like that... for distortion,
    check the roofline.)
     
    Robert Barr, Oct 29, 2004
    #18
  19. Marius Vollmer

    Tony Guest

    When you buy Sigma you are buying temporary. I suspect however that you will
    eventually buy a different body and be able to add inexpensive wides without
    buying crap at that time. If it is still functioning, you could sell the
    Sigma with the 10D.

    --
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
    home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
    The Improved Links Pages are at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
    A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
    http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

    "Marius Vollmer" <> wrote in message
    news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    > Hi,
    >
    > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    >
    > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    >
    > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > and autofocus performance.
    >
    > So, am I missing something?
    >
    > (I know about http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)
     
    Tony, Oct 29, 2004
    #19
  20. Marius Vollmer

    jean Guest

    Image quality depends a LOT on the medium you use to see it. On a 4x6 or
    5x7 print from film, it is very hard to see any of the defects which may
    come from the lens, from poor focussing or even camera movement. Looking at
    the same scene taken with a DSLR, all the defects show up very quickly on a
    computer monitor when the picture is blown up to it's normal size which is
    very often equivalent of a poster if it was printed. You could of course
    shrink it to the same size as a 4x6 print to eliminate the defects, but
    getting good lenses is better alternative.

    If you ever buy a Sigma lens, make sure you can return it and then test ALL
    functions, compare the results with another lens to make sure it is at least
    as good. I had a bad experience with a Sigma lens (28 f1,8) and I will not
    buy another one, ever. I tried a Tamron (28-75 f2,8) and it performed
    better, but I still had issues with it so I returned it before I got stuck
    with it.

    Jean

    "BG250" <> a écrit dans le message de
    news:...
    > I have no problem with image quality. Any Sigma I've owned was very good.
    > The problem is upgradeability. If you get a new Canon DSLR in the future,
    > the lens may not work. You have to send it for a digital lobotomy. If the
    > lens is so old, they may not be able to upgrade it. You could resell, but
    > value on 3rd party lenses is not too great.
    > bg
    >
    > "Marius Vollmer" <> wrote in message
    > news:-technik.uni-dortmund.de...
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > so I have bought a Canon EOS 10D with the 28-135 IS lens last year as
    > > my first camera ever, totally underestimating the effect of the 1.6
    > > crop factor, and now I want to have shorter focal lengths.
    > >
    > > But, the Canon lenses intended for APS-C sized sensors will not work
    > > on the 10D! I feel a bit left behind by Canon.
    > >
    > > Now, I'm torn between the Canon EF 17-40/4L and the Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX
    > > DC. The 17-40 is surely very nice, but the 18-50 is lighter, smaller
    > > (I think), has more reach on the tele side and is faster. It is also
    > > a bit cheaper. I can't really justify to myself buying the Canon, but
    > > the Sigma has no HSM, and while I am very happy with my Sigma 24/1.8
    > > EX, the Canon 28-135 leaves a much better impression in terms of build
    > > and autofocus performance.
    > >
    > > So, am I missing something?
    > >
    > > (I know about

    http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html,
    > > but I'm not that desperate, yet. :)

    >
    >
     
    jean, Oct 29, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jeff
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    4,405
  2. Gordon J. Rattray

    webcam forces disconnect...

    Gordon J. Rattray, Jul 25, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    673
    Yves Konigshofer
    Jul 26, 2005
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,758
  4. Replies:
    30
    Views:
    1,490
    Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
    May 4, 2005
  5. Allan

    Blu-ray and HD-DVD Join Forces.

    Allan, Apr 22, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    413
    Black Locust
    Apr 24, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page