well I'm having hard time to pick between the Canon 28 and sigma 30.
I read a lot of information between them some said the Canon is better focus faster and can work closer to the object but the sigma is more sharper and the color is warmer and works great in low light.
so people, please tell me what do you think about them. and if you have uses any of this two, tell me what do you think! please!
I'm using a Canon 50D camera, thanks for all of you!
to casperskitty and everyone, additional information:
i would use this lens for walk around. I have a 17-50 f/2.8 but seems like it is not good enough I don't know. and the 50mm f/1.8 that i have with the 50D, the focal length is a little too much.
I doubt that the Canon auto-focus can be too much faster. As to low-light, either is going to work well for that. The f/1.4 is only about 1/3 (oh, pardon me, 2/3-I wasn't worried about the math-the point is that it isn't much of a difference) stop wider than f/1.8 and that is barely enough to make a difference which is why the less expensive f/1.8 lenses are so popular. As to the angle of view, 2mm is hardly a big difference. Even on the 50D.
I guess that if fast focusing is important then go for the Canon. If you ever intend to buy a full frame camera, like the 1D and 5D series, you won't be able to use the Sigma on them. I don't know about the Canon and its full frame compatibility. If neither of these things matter, then it doesn't matter too much which lens you choose.
I'm sure that I haven't helped much ;) But I will say that I don't own either of these lenses as I don't own a Canon.
What are you wanting a lens in this range for exactly anyway?
edit-if the 17-50/2.8 doesn't work I don't know what will. f/2.8 is only 1 stop smaller than f/1.4 and despite what another poster said, that is not much of a difference. Try it. Set your aperture and shutter speed for proper exposure. Make an exposure. Now stop down the aperture one full stop and make another exposure. Can you really see that much of a dramatic difference? Probably not. Maybe what you really need is a tripod for longer exposures.
You read my mind about posting this Q & A!!!! Well.....not exactly. But I have looked at both lens extensively. So....here we go. BTW, I have the 40d.
The 28/1.8 is excellent for its price and AGE. The Sigma will be sharper, faster, and equal in autofocus. These lenses are not ideal for Fast Focus. They are more artistic purpose-driven--thin depth of field, super sharp, etc...That being said, I would probably stay with Canon over Sigma. Now the Sigma 50/1.4....yum!!! Awesome, awesome lens!! Unmatched for $500.00.
You will get this a lot: "What are you needing lens for? Portraits? Landscapes?" Well, I hate that question too, but it is important. on the 40d and 50d--not full frame cameras (like 5d mark II), the lens will be longer in focal length because of smaller image sensor. a 50mm= 83mm. a 30mm= 48mm.
Have you looked at the great Canon 35mm/f2? It is a forgotten lens, but supposed to trump both of those. It has better center sharpness and better colors. Just a hair slower. Lets be honest though, at 1.4 what are your real needs? Your depth of field is so shallow almost all images are useless.
Last thought: Have you considered renting from LensRentals.Com? They have both of those I think...i know the SIg 30mm for sure. Plus, they give all reviews on their site once you click on lens. For 50-75 per week, you may really save yourself a big pruchase, or confirm your original thougths.
And you will always lose at least 100.00 when you buy and sell lens. Trust me, I have lost plenty : )
Here are my lenses:
Canon 10-22mm; 100mm Macro/2.8; tamron 17-50/2.8; Canon 17-40 L; Canon 70-300 IS; Canon 28-135 IS
I'd go for the Sigma after reading reviews - and it's two-thirds of a stop faster - which represents a lot of light or a considerably faster shutter speed in low-light/handheld.
Answer by Mick on 06 Jan 2010 02:36:13
No comments:
Post a Comment