Bulbasaur.
I am pulling my hair out over this decision! photography is a huge deal to me and I plan on doing it as my profession. Right now I shoot with an 350D (xti) and I'm selling it. Don't ask me why. Well, at first I was going to go with a 400D because my sister has one, but she's made some complaints to me about how it feels more like a plastic toy among other technical things. Then somebody pushed me towards the Nikon D80 and I loooove it. HOWEVER, the canon has a specific lens that I dearly want. The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L. I've seen brilliant shots with it and it makes me lean more towards the canon- but that's the only reason I want to go Canon. So right now my decision relies on this question: is it worth going to one maker because of a particular lens? And also, are there any nikkor alternatives to the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L? Please. I'm practically ready to blindly decide.
Answer
Not really ... and that lens is not that inexpensive ... at $1,100.00 a copy.
The Nikon and Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 lenses ($1,500 to $1,700) are what most of the pros use. Nikon makes a similar lens, the 70-300 mm VR ($550) which is much more popular as an economy lens in that focal range.
Far and away the most useful lens for a pro is the 70-200 mm f/2.8 in the lens made for either camera system
Changing camera systems just so you can buy an economy lens in another, is false economy. The longer you have your camera system the more expensive it is to switch to another ... a lot like getting a divorce. I would cost me in excess of $50,000 to replace mine with a different one.
Stick with your D80 ... it is an exquisite camera and when you later update it in a few years, you will find that the sub-$1000 Nikon's will have many of the features the Nikon D3 has now, mainly very low noise at ISO over 6400 ... very important for shooting sports indoors and nature at dawn and dusk ... when the animals are out feeding.
Not really ... and that lens is not that inexpensive ... at $1,100.00 a copy.
The Nikon and Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 lenses ($1,500 to $1,700) are what most of the pros use. Nikon makes a similar lens, the 70-300 mm VR ($550) which is much more popular as an economy lens in that focal range.
Far and away the most useful lens for a pro is the 70-200 mm f/2.8 in the lens made for either camera system
Changing camera systems just so you can buy an economy lens in another, is false economy. The longer you have your camera system the more expensive it is to switch to another ... a lot like getting a divorce. I would cost me in excess of $50,000 to replace mine with a different one.
Stick with your D80 ... it is an exquisite camera and when you later update it in a few years, you will find that the sub-$1000 Nikon's will have many of the features the Nikon D3 has now, mainly very low noise at ISO over 6400 ... very important for shooting sports indoors and nature at dawn and dusk ... when the animals are out feeding.
Canon EF-s 55-250mm IS or Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM II Macro Lens?
a_joemar
which one has the overall output image quality?
Does Sigma is worth buying for compared to canon regarding this kind of model?
pls advice. thanks
Answer
Although fhotoace makes some decent points a lot of his discussion is about the Nikon system. I note you are using the canon system.
Some of Sigmas early AF lenses will either lock up the body with an Err99 fault, or can be used with limited functionality, i.e. either the af or aperture (or both will not operate) so you have to focus manually or use the lens at max aperture.
To be fair to Sigma, in most cases this is their very early AF lenses, of these the majority can be rechipped at modest cost by Sigma.
To bring the discussion bang up to date, all of Sigmas current range will work on your Canon DSLR, the DG and DC suffix indicates this (DG will work full frame and APS-C, DC will work fine on APS-C cameras but vignette on full frame cameras)
If canon still have lens firmware secrets up their sleeves then Sigma have a good track record of updating their lenses to suit and rechipping existing lenses.
TO your specific question, if the two lenses are a similar cost then I would go with the 70-200 f2.8. Although it has a narrower range (the difference between 55 & 70 and 200 & 250 isn't anything to get concerned about) the resolution and focus speed that the f2.8 lens allows makes it in the pro bracket.
As good a lens as the 55-250 IS is it isn't a patch on the 70-200 for image quality, build quality (internal zoom and non-rotating filter thread for sigma), The Sigma is at least a stop faster for most of the zoom range, this opens up more low light oportunities and the f2.8 max aperture brings your centre spot AF come alive.
For the future, the EF mount Sigma will fit canon full frame and APS-C bodies, the EF-S mount lens will only fit APS-C bodies.
I use three sigma lenses, the 12-24 EX DG, 70mm Macro f2.8 DG and 50-500 EX DG alongside my L lenses (17-40, 24TSE and 200 f2.8) with no problems on my digital and film EOS bodies.
If the price is right go for the Sigma 70-200 f2.8.
The major companies have been overpricing cheaply made basic telezooms for years, Sigma can keep their costs down as they manufacture for all mounts and so have a bigger economies of scale when it comes to research & development costs etc.
At the very top end then I would stick to the manufacturers pro offerings, at the end of the market you are looking at buying third party can offer some great lenses for good prices.
Although fhotoace makes some decent points a lot of his discussion is about the Nikon system. I note you are using the canon system.
Some of Sigmas early AF lenses will either lock up the body with an Err99 fault, or can be used with limited functionality, i.e. either the af or aperture (or both will not operate) so you have to focus manually or use the lens at max aperture.
To be fair to Sigma, in most cases this is their very early AF lenses, of these the majority can be rechipped at modest cost by Sigma.
To bring the discussion bang up to date, all of Sigmas current range will work on your Canon DSLR, the DG and DC suffix indicates this (DG will work full frame and APS-C, DC will work fine on APS-C cameras but vignette on full frame cameras)
If canon still have lens firmware secrets up their sleeves then Sigma have a good track record of updating their lenses to suit and rechipping existing lenses.
TO your specific question, if the two lenses are a similar cost then I would go with the 70-200 f2.8. Although it has a narrower range (the difference between 55 & 70 and 200 & 250 isn't anything to get concerned about) the resolution and focus speed that the f2.8 lens allows makes it in the pro bracket.
As good a lens as the 55-250 IS is it isn't a patch on the 70-200 for image quality, build quality (internal zoom and non-rotating filter thread for sigma), The Sigma is at least a stop faster for most of the zoom range, this opens up more low light oportunities and the f2.8 max aperture brings your centre spot AF come alive.
For the future, the EF mount Sigma will fit canon full frame and APS-C bodies, the EF-S mount lens will only fit APS-C bodies.
I use three sigma lenses, the 12-24 EX DG, 70mm Macro f2.8 DG and 50-500 EX DG alongside my L lenses (17-40, 24TSE and 200 f2.8) with no problems on my digital and film EOS bodies.
If the price is right go for the Sigma 70-200 f2.8.
The major companies have been overpricing cheaply made basic telezooms for years, Sigma can keep their costs down as they manufacture for all mounts and so have a bigger economies of scale when it comes to research & development costs etc.
At the very top end then I would stick to the manufacturers pro offerings, at the end of the market you are looking at buying third party can offer some great lenses for good prices.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment