Looking at getting these lenses!

[helloimjammie]

Hey guys just wanted to know if anyone has had any experiences with these lenses! Any feedback you have or any other cheaper alternatives would be appreciated! just starting to save now will probably get them around July - August time!

My camera body is a Canon 50D and its has a battery grip. So it's crop, but I will be upgrading to a 5dmkii or iii at some point, but I'm wanting to buy lenses for my current body instead of buy for a body I don't have!

Sigma 10-20mm f3.5
Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 os
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Canon 100mm f2.8 IS macro
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 os (or thinking of getting Canon 70-200mm f4 L IS)

Currently have a range of old M42 lenses for playing with and they're good! Also have a Canon 50mm f1.8 and a Sigma 15-30mm f3.5-4.5 (wanting to upgrade this though!)

Already heard a lot of good about the Siggy 10-20mm! But if anyone has any of the above lenses and some samples with pros and cons let me know?


Cheers guys!

 

[unofficialPete]

I know you don't want to get carried away thinking about a camera you don't own and whilst they are all superb lenses only 1 is forward compatible (correct me if wrong).

I used to own a 40D Canon 10-22, 17-55 IS and 70-200 Non IS f4, similar to the above line up and will cover all your needs.

Do you have a special area of interest? Perhaps invest more in those areas with forward compatible glass OR saying that the second hand market is always good so buy what you need now.

Deffo take the 70-200 f4 IS over the Sigma IMO.

 

[Addicted]

I suppose the only question I'll ask is do you NEED all of those lenses?

Haven't any experience with them apart from the Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 and would say if you don't mind having a lower range, the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 is fantastic for the dollar (albeit more expensive though).

 

[f0xy]

Its completely different doing from a 1.6 crop to FF. I used to have a 40D also, but all the lenses were irrelevant as everything changes so much with the focal length difference.

My most used lenses are 28mm f1.8, 100mm f2 and 300mm f4L on my 5Dii, and they are all great with it being FF. I've kinda stuck with primes this time round, and do actually prefer it over having a zoom. The only zoom I would buy now would have to be L glass if I ever went down that route.

The 100mm f2 is incredibly sharp, and I went for it over the 2.8 macro as after reading lots on-line it seemed to be the preferred model. The 28mm is great being wide, very light too. I occasionally use a 14mm 2.8 and a 50mm 1.8, but the above 3 are the most used.

 

[helloimjammie]

Hey guys cheers for the responses, I love macro and landscape work and also portraiture! So I was trying to cover those tbh! And the only reason I really wanted to get the 30 f1.4 is to get rid of the 15-30 because its so heavy and to have a 30 f1.4 as a street photography lens and a general walkabout in my eyes would be good enough.

I'm debating the 100mm f2 L macro as I've heard it is ridiculously sharp, but I'm still learning with macro so I thought the cheaper 2.8 non L would be good for now! And I can also use this as a portrait lens if I don't want to lug around a 70-200?

So landscape I would cover with the 10-20, was intrigued by the Tokina, as I've read good things about it so it would probably be worth the extra but I don't think I'll be disappointed with the sig 10-20 (even if I got the cheaper variable aperture version) as I would use them at high apertures anyway, f8ish mostly during the day with an ND?

And was looking at the 50-150 sigma as it is like a 70-200 on a crop sensor (or as close as can get) but even the 70-200 f4 non is has amazing reviews so I think I'd even be pleased with that! This would be the lens I would use for portraits! With 1-3 off camera flashes!

What do you think now I've explained it better/ tried to lol!

 

[JamesBryan]

I know you mentioned that you were looking to get lenses that are for your current body, but i'd definitely consider ones that are more suited for full frame.

The Sigma 10-20mm will only be of use on a crop body like your 50D, an alternative would be the Canon 17-40mm f4L.

The next lens i would consider is the Sigma 50mm f1.4, great lens and it's suitable for both sensor sizes.

The 100mm macro you mentioned sounds fine, great for portrait work too. I'm currently waiting for a Canon 135mm f2L (meant to be THE sharpest lens Canon do)

For a zoom i'd go with the Canon 70-200mm f4L non IS or the f2.8L non IS if you can stretch that far.

 

[helloimjammie]

Hey man! Yea ill definitely get the sigma for now, and will look into getting a 17-40 L too possibly? Because even that will be a good replacement for my sig 15-30? yeah I might just get the 100 macro because its good for both macro/portraits alike, and I can stretch as far as a 70-200 2.8 non is so would that be worth it? Over an is f4?

Cheers for all the advice

 

[JamesBryan]

Yeah the 70-200mm f2.8 would be worth it over the f4.

 

[helloimjammie]

Yeah the 70-200mm f2.8 would be worth it over the f4.

Been reading a lot if reviews and seems even the 2.8 non is, is still a fantastic performer but for £900 new it should be I guess lol!

 

[Cup_Phil]

Ignore everyone who keeps saying to get lenses suited for full frame for exactly the reasons f0xy states

Going from 1.6crop to FF the range of the lens is so different you'll get rid of most things you own anyway
70-200 f2.8 IS is brilliant on my 50D and my 7D for track photography - but on my mates 5D MKII we use it indoors as a studio lens
I can take a photo of someone in my living room at 140mm - there's a huge difference in the reach

The 50mm 1.4 on a FF is about the same reach as a 28mm on a crop. But if you buy a 50mm now just because it's more FF friendly you'll be cursing how it isn't wide enough.
Buy for the body you have

Also not everyone wants to go full frame. If you take action shots you'll be going up to a 7D not a 5D.... anyway rant over

The 30mm f1.4 I had last year and it's a lovely lens but suffers from Sigma's legendarily s**t quality control. They under or over focus quite a bit. If you have the patience to send one off to be calibrated though they are lovely
The canon 28mm f1.8 is a better built alternative with the same reach

The canon 17-40mm f4L is VERY bulky and heavy as a walk around lens so I'd rule that out. It's also too slow for anything indoors
The 10-20 is lovely for a landscape lens


Right now... portraits.. 70-200 this is tricky

The 70-200 f4 non-IS is pin sharp, light and very cheap for the IQ it provides. But you'll be dissapointed with f4 for portraits
I had a 70-200 f2.8 non-IS and that was superb for portrait shots BUT it was VERY expensive. My mate has a 135mm f2L which I played with and it's even sharper and cheaper.
But then you don't have the flexibility of a zoom. The 135mm f2 is superb for setup portrait shots but for action shots the flexibility of the 70-200 is well worth it.
Very difficult to choose lol

 

[JamesBryan]

The canon 17-40mm f4L is VERY bulky and heavy as a walk around lens so I'd rule that out. It's also too slow for anything indoors
The 10-20 is lovely for a landscape lens

The 17-40 f4L is 474g and the Sigma 10-20mm is 470g. Hardly heavy :S

 

[Cup_Phil]

No sorry I meant in comparison to the siggy 30mm which he said he was going to use as a walk around lens

For a landscape lens I still wouldn't buy the 17-40 f4L as it's so fecking expensive and you don't need glass that fast for landscape stuff

Don't get me wrong I had the 17-40 and it's absolutely superb but it could really do with being an f2.8

 

[f0xy]

Another thing I should have mentioned, using the 300mm (for motorsport) on a crop sensor was great, as you could fill the frame properly on pretty much any circuit, and not have to crop the sh*t out of it to get a well framed picture.

Now, when I came to use that on a FF, it was like I didn't have enough reach in some places (fair enough probably 10-15% of circuits you can get pretty close to certain parts of the track, and it would be spot on), but with safety being paramount for spectators nowadays there are more fences than ever and spectators are usually put further back. All well and good if you've got a media pass and can get behind the armco but you would be in the very small minority.

It also depends what type of shot you want, either a 50-75% crop on the image you've taken, or a frame filling shot that does not even need a crop, to which I preferred the latter. To overcome it I use the 300mm with a 1.4x tele, its still pin sharp and f5.6 is just about enough to make fences disappear in good light. The 2.8 would be a better for this, but for nearly four grand its never going to be an option.

A 70-200mm would be ideal on a cropped sensor (112mm-320mm) and give you a good range if your taking those sort of pictures, I had one for a while years back and it was brilliant. But for me personally, the 70-200mm was not long enough for what I wanted to use it for on a FF body. Like Phil said, buy for the body you've got, if you get good lenses you'l always be able to sell them for the same money if you change to FF in the future and buy whatever you want for that.

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

Lenses are assets.

Buy whatever you want/need and sell if/when the time comes.

I went from 450D to 7D because going FF was unjustifiable to me. Megabucks for the body and lenses are silly money too... If I was getting paid to shoot - different story.

If I sold all my lenses and upgraded tomorrow, I don't think I'd be far out of pocket, even though they're all 3-5 year old lenses now.

 

[helloimjammie]

Yeah I quite fancy upgrading to a 7d! Because the price tag of a full frame is just redic! The only thing I'd do is probably buy a 2nd hand 5d classic off eBay! Just because for portraits, and landscape, the wider FOV and the delicious Bokeh you get from a FF is just what I want! But my 50d has neve let me down, and I don't feel the need to upgrade yet, still under 15,000 shutter actuations as well! So it's got loads of life. We will see what time brings, as I would like to get into paid photography even if its just blowing up and sellings canvas prints? But I know it's a hard industry to get into, but I'm only 19 so I've got a while yet to up my skills I think?

I can but dream though right?
But as a hobby, I absolutely love it. I've always loved art all the way through school.

Started out with a micro 4/3 Olympus ep1, then a 500d and now a 50d. And I've enjoyed my current journey with it.

Sorry about my life story. Something just urged me to blabber. Feel free to ignore lmfao!

 

[Jay_A]

I shoot with a Canon 24-105L 99% of the time. And very occasionally might use the 50mm. personally I'd invest in better quality glass than lots of lenses. Trust me

 

[helloimjammie]

Do you use that on a crop? Because 24-105 would be good all round lens?

 

[Cup_Phil]

I'm tempted by a 24-105L as my walk around lens - just a shame it's only f4

 

[JJ!]

Tamron 24-70 VC f2.8 looks like an excellent option for full framers.

 

[Jay_A]

Do you use that on a crop? Because 24-105 would be good all round lens?

5D mk III (full frame).

Not saying that's the lens to go for, but having moved to L glass, the quality is stunning.

 

[TheEvilGiraffe]

I wouldn't want 24-105 (38-~165) on a crop .. waaay too narrow at the bottom end still and not enough length either really.

As I said - lenses are assets. Buy one, use it, get on with it - great. Don't ? Sell up and get something else.

Don't go buying half a dozen at once (unless you've got £millions in the bank) as you'll never use half of them.

 

[dunganick]

17-40 bulky.... hmm?

On a crop body i would buy the following and then work outwards/trade into better glass.

Sigma 10-20

Canon 70-200 (either the 70-200 F4 Non IS or the 70-200 F2.8 Non IS)


Personally i hate 1.6 crop sensors, they take fine images (and have their advantages for long focal lengths), but alot of the L glass has very awkward focal lengths when used on 1.6. 17mm for example is not very wide on 1.6 crop. And 70mm is too long for alot of circumstances the 70-200 is great at dealing with.

Personally i would get yourself a used 1dmk3 with this large bag of cash you appear to have. the .3 difference in crop makes a world of difference. And despite the lower Megapixel and a few other bits that should make the 50d a better camera, it's just not.

You can shoot nearly everything with 1dmk3 17-40 and 70-200 2.8 non IS (plus a 1.4x tc)

 

[helloimjammie]

Haha I love how you said about the 1dmk3 as I was literally looking at the 1dmk2/3 on the bay today!! Yeah I defiantly want the 10-20 and the 70-200 and I think I'd use those both a lot, it's just the focal lengths in between (that I don't really use other than for standard walk about stuff?). And im not super rich or have a huge lepricorn pot of money lmao, I'm only 19 I just save as much as I can to be able to treat myself to the things I want that's all

 

[Cup_Phil]

I wouldn't want 24-105 (38-~165) on a crop .. waaay too narrow at the bottom end still and not enough length either really.

As I said - lenses are assets. Buy one, use it, get on with it - great. Don't ? Sell up and get something else.

Don't go buying half a dozen at once (unless you've got £millions in the bank) as you'll never use half of them.

I used to do exactly this - had well over 15 lenses in 3 years, but these days losing 15-20% in ebay/paypal fees is crippling.
It would actually be cheaper to rent a lens for a week before buying it

That's what I'm doing with my next purchase - renting a 70-300mm L for a few events to see if I like it before I throw £1k+ at one
Renting for a week is about £80 - whereas spend £1k and sell 3 months later you get about £900 - fees = £750 ish

 

[helloimjammie]

I used to do exactly this - had well over 15 lenses in 3 years, but these days losing 15-20% in ebay/paypal fees is crippling.
It would actually be cheaper to rent a lens for a week before buying it

That's what I'm doing with my next purchase - renting a 70-300mm L for a few events to see if I like it before I throw £1k+ at one
Renting for a week is about £80 - whereas spend £1k and sell 3 months later you get about £900 - fees = £750 ish

I never thought of renting a lens first to try it! I might look into doing that, and see whether I would actually use it or not! Im thinking of just getting an ultra wide angle and a tele photo (as I'd use these most) and just get a general walk around lens or even just a prime. Going to look into renting now!