NEW, MACRO for 350d help please.

Boon

Boon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,619
Edit My Images
Yes
hi
i mentioned to the wife that i would like a wide angle lens, she said 'ok get one ':D , but i said it may cost £500, she said ' ok get one ' :D
i have had a look at Matts lens links and a couple of the wide angle lens dont sound too good, Canon EF 2.8 USM had wobbly pieces in the test, and the Canon EF2.8 IS USM L has very strong barrel distortion at 16mm.
What about other brands, i dont know what is compatible with mine, any help would be appreciated.
 
Another backer for the Sigma here, although depends on your motives, do you specifically want a prime for its large aperture.
 
thanks guys, nice photo's. Is this the f/2.8 or what?
with the 2.8 being equilvalent to f/3.5 is it worth me getting something like, say f/1.8
as you can probably guess, i am not confident with what differences mm and F numbers are.
Are the sigma EF lenses?
 
The Sigma is an EF lens in its Canon format, but is designed for croppoed sensors, so will fit any Canon but works best with the 1.6x cropped sensors found in the 300D, 350D, 20D, & 30D. Its a f4 to f5.6 aperture.

The Sigma 12-24mm f4.5 - 5.6.

Theres also the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5 - 4.5, costs around £474.98 from here : Linky

Theres also the Tokina 12-24mm f4.

Personally chose the Sigma 10-20 because:

1. Its very wide (which was the whole point)
2. Good reviews and results from other users (see some posts by Petemc here )
3. Price - good lens, but a good deal cheaper then most of the alternatives.
4. Build quality.
 
thanks guys, i am not in a rush, so i'll look around a bit longer.
 
Well 500 sobs puts you in the ball park for a Canon 17-40L Steve. There's no problem with future compatibility should you upgrade your body, and at f4 throughout the zoom range it's not slow unless you're particularly looking for a faster lens? It's not particularly wide on a 1.6X crop body - 27mm equivalent on your 350D, but it's a known crisp performer with lovely colour rendition, and one of the relatively few weather sealed Canon lenses. It'll keep it's value too should you want to sell it later. :)
 
The f number is derived by dividing the physical width of the lens at full aperture into the focal length. A 50 mm standard lens having a max aperture measuring 50mm would be an f1 lens!! Canon did once used to make such an animal - at a price. :grin:
 
hi CT
what would i gain buying the Canon 17-40L over the 17-85 EFS-IS USM i already have, i know the L means a lot, but would it be any wider?
 
No m8, they are both 17mm at their widest.
 
Boon said:
hi CT
what would i gain buying the Canon 17-40L over the 17-85 EFS-IS USM i already have, i know the L means a lot, but would it be any wider?
Click to expand...

No it's no wider Steve. I didn't realise you had that lens mate. Well you'd gain compatibilty with 1 series cameras but lose IS. The only reason I parted with my 17-85 was that it wouldn't fit the 1D so probably not the best idea for you then. :)
 
Boon said:
hi
i mentioned to the wife that i would like a wide angle lens, she said 'ok get one ':D , but i said it may cost £500, she said ' ok get one ' :D
Click to expand...


does rohypronol have commonplace usage in your household, that does not sound like the actions of a compus-mentis wife.....:nuts:
 
whitewash said:
does rohypronol have commonplace usage in your household, that does not sound like the actions of a compus-mentis wife.....:nuts:
Click to expand...

i take it rohypronol must be some kind of drug, but no, my wife is completely sane and very understanding, :grin: if i told her the guys on this forum recomended a lens to me at a cost of whatever, she would say ' buy it ', but at the end of the day, we both put money in the pot.
 
so ok then guys, do i look for a f/2.8 sort of thing, or do i look for mm sort of thing:thinking:
 
Wide is measured in mm, speed is measured in f's.

so a 10mm lens is wider than a 17mm lens, the F's of both has nothing to do with the price of cheese or their wideness either.
 
Just wondering why you want something wider than 17mm Boon? Specific need?
 
I have recently bought the Sigma 10-20mm for my Nikon D70, and am really pleased with it. You just have to be careful not to get your feet in the shot ;)
Have a look on the Bristol Cameras website - their service is fantastic and prices are very competitive.
 
Another vote for the sigma here. Only drawback is it's not suitable for full frame cameras, so if you upgrade at anytime you'll possibly have to sell it, as CT mentions above.

Canon do make a 10-22mm Ef-s but you'll have the same problem with the upgrade path and it's a 100 quid dearer.


Personaly, I'd get the sigma and just accept the fact that it'll have to go if you go full frame.
 
dod said:
Just wondering why you want something wider than 17mm Boon? Specific need?
Click to expand...

no specific need at all dod, in fact, after my trip to Skipton today, i really dont think i need anything wider than 17mm, so i have decided to go down the macro route, now tell me a good macro to get.
 
Well, I want to add the Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro to my equipment and I have heard a lot of people say it is a great lens so...
 
Well i want the canon 100mm macro as well. :naughty: it has great reviews. But i think i am going to go for the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro. Mainly for budget reasons.
 
lumpster said:
But i think i am going to go for the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro. Mainly for budget reasons.
Click to expand...

i have just been looking at that lens lumpy, it looks quite good, wonder how it compares to the canon though:thinking:
 
SammyC said:
Wide is measured in mm, speed is measured in f's.

so a 10mm lens is wider than a 17mm lens, the F's of both has nothing to do with the price of cheese or their wideness either.
Click to expand...

thank you sammy, now i know, and there's no F in cheese either:razz: :D
 
I have the Sigma 150 mm macro as does pxl8 (though I'm not sure my results compare to his :) ) . You can search the forums to see what it can do macro wise.

Got to say though I am also impressed with its abilities as a 150mm f2.8 prime. Not really had much application for it yet but i did point it at some sparrows on holiday recently and thought they came out well :)

sparrow1.jpg


sparrow2.jpg
 
thanks robert, i have seen busterboy and sean Mcr rave about prime lenses, i am not sure i would know what the difference is, but these pictures look good to me.
does the prime have any advantages??
 
Get the Nikon 105mm f2.8 Vr If Ed alphabet soup lens.

oh, sorry, you need canon don't you!

Sigma 150mm then. I've not heard or seen a bad thing about it!
 
Boon said:
does the prime have any advantages??
Click to expand...

Sharpness has to be the main one. They are generally larger apertures (lower f stop number ;) ) too so are better in lower light.

Some say the restrictions it places on you to frame the shot well is an advantage too - forcing you to think more about the shot.
 
Gandhi said:
Sigma 150mm then. I've not heard or seen a bad thing about it!
Click to expand...
Me neither. I've got the canon 100mm but I was considering trading it for the sigma last year but never got round to it due to other priorities. It really does look like real quality and after the experience I've had with the 70-200 I would be pretty confident about it :)
 
Sigma 150mm Macro is definately my next lens purchase (unless the 500mm F4 suddenly drops in price hugely :D ).
Not sure what other lenses you have but for £500'ish you could go the other way and even buy a BIGMA ;)
 
Boon said:
thanks robert, i have seen busterboy and sean Mcr rave about prime lenses, i am not sure i would know what the difference is, but these pictures look good to me.
does the prime have any advantages??
Click to expand...

I'm going to stick my neck out here and assume you're asking what does prime mean. I appologise in advance if you already know and you think I'm being condescending! :)

A prime lens is one that has a fixed focal length (x mm). So the opposite of a zoom lens, there is no twiddly bit that lets you get closer further away you have to use your legs!

The main advantage is that it can be optimised for that fixed focal length so should be sharper than an equivalent zoom, and also because it doesn't need to contain lots of zoom gubbins internally it usually can support a much wider apperture i.e. smaller f number.

Sorry again if that's stating the bleedin' obvious. :)
 
Oh, and what about extension tubes instead of a dedicated macro lens? Should work out cheaper.
 
thanks for that sammy, nicely put, and you assumed rightly too:D
Now that poses another problem, if one gets a prime lens, and you have to walk backwards /forwards to get something into focus, as the DOF is shallow, what would be the prime(sorry about the pun) use of such a lens, because surely you must be limited with it.
many thanks for the help.
 
It focuses just like the lens you are used to for 'normal' shots. You can manual focus or use autofocus. The walking about gets you the effect you are used to by zooming with a zoom lens - changing how much of the scene is in the frame.

With macro the focus is quite critical and any movement can get you re-focusing. Autofocus will usually go off hunting for focus when all you really wanted was a small adjustment. Repeat that 10 times in a minute and you spend a lot of time looking at a blur and getting annoyed. Thats why you normally use manual focus for macro shots - you correct the focus yourself either by turning the focus ring a tiny bit or moving a little nearer/away from the subject.
 
Oh and used as a standard lens the DOF is the same as any lens you are used to. Close up at macro distances is where the DOF get shallow - hence the careful focusing
 
A Sigma 150mm macro arrived here from Onestop Digital on Monday, and so far I can't fault it except that it weighs a bit. :)

mac40.jpg


Nobody in the UK had one in stock, but it only took 4 days to arrive from Hong Kong (ordered on Thursday) and at £343 it was about £70 cheaper than over here. ;)
 
silkstone said:
A Sigma 150mm macro arrived here from Onestop Digital on Monday, and so far I can't fault it except that it weighs a bit. :)


Nobody in the UK had one in stock, but it only took 4 days to arrive from Hong Kong (ordered on Thursday) and at £343 it was about £70 cheaper than over here. ;)
Click to expand...

hi silkstone
does this include VAT, p+p and customs stuff, dont want any nasty suprises.
 
There was no VAT or duty to pay, and they guarantee to refund it if you do get charged. (Their website has a form to fill in for a refund if necessary.)

So no unpleasant surprises, and very good service. :)
 
i think i will have to ponder a while on this, not sure what i REALLY want, i have also been thinking about a 70-300 zoom too, for birds etc, so i am going to give myself some time out, and get it right.
and thanks for all the help everyone.
 
Not a bad idea :)

I prefer to buy used on the basis that I can sell it again for more or less what I paid for it. The plan doesn't quite work as I have only ever got round to selling one lens so far :lol:
 
What do you want to do the most?

When you've decided that then the choice of lens becomes far more simple.

If you want to spend more time shooting birds/nature etc then get a decent zoom lens

If you want close ups of flowers and creepy crawlies then get a macro lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top