EF 20-35 vs Sigma 15-30 - Which one?

[partialresponse]

I'm still trying to acquire a real lens for my 10D and I can truthfully say that it's a very difficult decision. To put things in perspective, I'm an amateur (please don't convince me I need the 17-40L....do I?)

Right now I'm "focussing" on the wide end for general subjects....people etc etc. and have narrowed it down to the Canon EF 20-35 f3.5-4.5 USM and the Sigma 15-30 EX. Which of these two lenses gives nicer pictures?

I will also get (in addition to either of these) the EF 50 1.8 II.

Thanks

Kofi

[brunz]

The 20-35 Canon is sharp, light weight and I use one at weddings all of the time. I highly recommend it. Its a bargain for the price. Sigmas are ok but unless you need the extra 5 mm of wide angle, go with the Canon.You will not be disappointed. It's a USM lens too which means it is fast focusing.

[DWard]

I have the Sigma 15-30 and find that it is contrasty, sharp and the extra 5mm does make a difference to me.

With 35mm I liked 24mm and even 20mm for wide angle and the 15mm with the 1.6 factor gives me about the same perspective as a 24mm. The 20mm will be about the same as a 30mm on 35mm film.

If you already have the 10D go to a camera store and take some shots with each, then go home and spend some time with them in PS.

I'm still tempted to get the 14mm rectileniar fisheye. Its just that the software to properly get rid of the barrel distortion doubles the price of the lens.

Good luck and have fun.

David

[mkaplan]

I have not used the 20-35 so I can not comment on the quality that way but I have the 15-30 and it is a very very nice lens and at a great price considering its quality and the fact that it is not a L lens.

As far as quality of glass goes... the Canon 20-35 USM 2.8 (I guess that is the model you are referring to and not the 20-35L 2.8) has a MTF rating of 3.18 ( the L btw has a 3.22 rating) where as the 15-30 has a 3.47 rating. The quality of the glass on the Sigma 15-30 is of better quality that the other 2 lenses. Not by any great leaps and bounds but better none-the-less. The only one better is the 16-35 USM L which is rated 3.97 and maybe the 17-40L which is not yet listed.

Here is the link in case you want to check it out yourself or want to check out other lenses in the future.
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm

A lot of people also refer to Photodo for MTF ratings. There is 2 things why I prefer Photozone. 1) Because they take different sources and average them out. You can get a good or bad sample of any lens and I like the fact there are many sources that came to the average where you know your lens will probably be and 2) Photodo stopped lens testing a few years ago. That means you can not get any tests on any newer lenses like the 15-30.

Michael Kaplan
Montreal, Canada
Canon EOS-10D
http://www.pbase.com/mkaplan

[rdenney]

Thanks for the link. I just spent some time there, and I found that if you go into the numerical database, the Sigma 15-30 is rated much lower than in the summar list to which you referred. The Canon had the same rating in both places (the 3.18 you mentioned). Any idea why?

Rick "wondering if that is a database of subjective opinions that might be biased by other factors such as cost" Denney

[partialresponse]

I went and took some shots this weekend with both the Sigma 15-30 and the Canon 20-35 3.5-4.5 USM. The Sigma focussing seemed uncertain....unlike the Canon. Also, the Sigma does not appear to have as much contrast as the Canon. Because of this, I feel I should write off the Sigma. Unfortunately I also compared the Canon 17-40L with the 20-35. No contest....the 17-40 is much better (higher resolution, greater contrast). I should not have done this because now I want the 17-40L but don't want to pay $800 for a lens!

This is a losing battle.

Kofi

[mkaplan]

rdenney wrote:
Thanks for the link. I just spent some time there, and I found that if you go into the numerical database, the Sigma 15-30 is rated much lower than in the summar list to which you referred. The Canon had the same rating in both places (the 3.18 you mentioned). Any idea why?

Rick "wondering if that is a database of subjective opinions that might be biased by other factors such as cost" Denney

I can not tell you why. One thing I hear is Sigma's quality control may be off. I hear people sometime have to go thru a few lenses to find a good one or send it to Sigma for Adjustment. They are very good about it though also from what I hear. Mine seems good although I will have to do more testing to really find out. The reason I like that list is because it is an average of a few tests so it will allow for a bad or good sample of a lens. Even with Canon, they are all not perfect. You hear of people even having those same problems with "L" lenses.

The numeric list I don't think is the same. It may come from users opinions whereas the link I left is supposedly from valid tests from different magazines. All I know is I am happy with my purchase which after everything is all that counts :).

[kwclay]

check out this site. I really like it myself. Gives you the opinion of users who have a hands on. this link is to the review of the Sigma 15-30

http://www.photographyreview.com/35mm,Zoom/Sigma,15-30mm,f3.5-4.5,EX,DG,/PRD_96751_3128crx.aspx

[NILOLIGIST]

All,

Although, I don't have a 10D, just suppose I was thinking of getting one, what would be a good all around lens to start with?

Also, if I were getting the 10D, I would of course plan
on getting the following, would any of these be a good first lens for all around types of photography? I was thinking the 24-70 but not sure. Again, this is if I were getting a 10D. If I could give up one the listed below, which would it be?

Canon L-Series
17-40mm f/4L USM
24-70mm f/2.8L USM
70-200mm f/2.8L IS
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

NiL

[CyberDyneSystems]

niloligist,

If you can afford that treasue trove of Lenses,. then you have nothing to decide,.. you allready have a near perfect set up in that list there! 8)

As far as which to start with? Assumiong you were shooting for the end goal of ending up with that list,.. I would start with the 24mm-70mm. This will be the best all around lense in that lline up.

After that,. it depends on your shooting style. If wildlife is your passion you would jump straight to the 100-400mm IS,.. at which point you could leave the gap between 70mm and 100mm for a while and go wide woth the 17-40mm

But if its more wide angle work your shooting,.. (Like in NYC :D ) then after the 24-70mm you might want the 17-40mm.

As far as the Sigma 15-30 Vs. a Canon,..

I was very close to getting either the Sigma 15-30 or the 17-35mm.... I tried the 15-30mm in a shop and was a bit taken aback by the design,..

This lens is nearly $500.00

Here's the thing. For a newcomer to SLRs,.. the sticker shock for the lenses is firghtening.

I've invested quite a lot in lenses now,. and as you do so,.. you begin to understand that the better you get the first time the better off you are. Lenses are like a good Monitor. You can buy them once if plan ahead. If you don't you will end up getting better ones and have no idea what to do with the first round. Unlike a Camera or a computer where you may keep upgrading,. on and on, with the lenses you have an opportunity to get it right the first time.

So,. I ended up spending the extra $300.00 on the Canon 17-40mm "L"

Don't get me wrong. I own a number of great Sigma Lenses. But those that I own are 1/3 the cost of the nearest Canon equivelent. In the case of the 15-30mm EX Vs. the 17-40mm "L" the Sigma was about 2/3 the cost so I went with Canon.

[NILOLIGIST]

CyberDyneSystems,

That is just a wish list. I am just wondering which lens do I get first? I know which I will get second, the 100-400 for the US Tennis Open in September. If I were getting the 10D, I would want as much practice with that lens as possible. I would not expect to take great photos right away, so I would use that one often to get the feel of it so at the match, I don't miss a thing.

So, which would you get first, the 17-40 or the 24-70. I can't really spend that much right away, I want to go with the 17-40, I plan on getting a lens a month if I were buying. I would get the 70-200 last, since it costs the most although, I am sure I would use it more than the 100-400 but practice comes first. I will have them all by September. Which teleconverter should I purchase? The 1.4x II Extender or the 2x II Extender EF? For the lens I have mentioned.

Do you think both are needed 17-40 & 24-70? I am thinking that, that is a bit too indulgent. Do you think I can substitute maybe the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5? I know it is not as good as the others but price wise and my time constraints, it might work out better.

Your advice is NEEDED!

NiL

[CyberDyneSystems]

Probably stick with the 1.4 X first,. It will work great on Both the 100-400mm IS and the 70-200mm. The 2X will be fine on the 70-200,.. but why bother when the 100-400mm wil do the same thing better and be wider at the wide end. And the 2X will be a littl bit of a harder sell on the 100-400mm IS.

Neither will work on the other two lenses.

re: 17-40mm and 24-70mm?

Personally ,. I would start with the 24-70. This is considered to be in the "Normal" range of zoom and thus will fit a lot of applications.

I've had my 10D for nearly two months now and the widest lens I have is a Sigma Zoom starting at 28mm.

I very rarely have wished for wider than that 28mm.

I have the 17-40mm on order right now (B&H Was out of stock :( ) and can't wait to try it,.. but again,. despite the hole in my lens collection at the wide end,. I don't think this will be the lens I use a lot.

It really does depend on what you shoot though!

One other consideration... which of the two is heavier?

For a starting lens you will want a lens where it is easy to have the camera with you. (either way it wil be a lot more bulky than your G3!!!! ) any ways portability may be a consideration for what I like to call a "Walking around" lens.

[NILOLIGIST]

CyberDyneSystems,

Ok, but budget wise, the 17-40 is more affordable right now. But, if I go to B&H this week and they don't have that lens, I will wait. I am not going to buy the $1349.00 lens in addition to $1499.99 camera at the same time. I want to space out my purchases. I will consider trading in my G3, which will help and if it does then I will get the $1349.00 lens. Boy, this is so expensive. I am spending all my traveling money. :(

Have to take a cheap, cheap vacation somewhere, I can't wait until next year. LOL

I see you didn't even mention my substitute lens, I guess it is that bad huh? Well, I really don't want to buy non-L glass anyway. I forgot to add the 180 macro, what do you think about that lens too? This is my christmas and birthday all wrapped into one. After all of the L-glass I will work on my carbon tripod and then I am done, a few polarizers and that it is it. I don't need any bags I have plenty. LOL

Thanks for all your help. Get ready, if I take the plunge, I will be crying here, why aren't my photos sharp, what am I doing wrong, same thing like I did with the G3.

I remember you told me before, to keep the G3 and learn to shoot with it then upgrade. But, to say I have DSLR fever is an understatement, I want it bad. I want to do things that the G3 just cannot do. Sporting events from a distance requires real lens and a better camera. I will still be learning and I am not thinking of upgrading for any other reason than, I want to do other things with my camera the the G3 is just not capable of handling.

So wish me luck and stay tune, I will need your advice. One good thing is I have been reading the 10D manual so I am a little familiar with some of the settings. The only thing I am afraid of is the focus not being right and me not knowing. I don't want to have to send my 10D in for service, that will really be bad. But, I read only 10D threads and I am excited about what I may do.

I will for now, try the $799 lens, if I don't like it, I will go back and trade it for the $1349.00. I will view it as a savings, I am not sure I would need both. That will get me closer to the macro lens, not sure I would need that one either. I really don't want 5million lens either. I really want a carbon tripod, they are so light and I want a light one so I don't mind paying the price for it. I have the photo vest, so carrying the lens is not as bad as carrying them in my bag, which gets so heavy that it hurts my arm. I want to be able to just put my camera in a bag and carry the rest on the outside. Living in NYC, I don't want to attract too much attention riding the subways.

Well, we will see what happens.

NiL,

[CyberDyneSystems]

niloligist wrote:

I see you didn't even mention my substitute lens, I guess it is that bad huh? Well, I really don't want to buy non-L glass anyway....
NiL,

!!!!
No I missed it all together? ? ? ?

Nililogist,.. with your list of lenses I just thought you must be made of money :D lol :)

No by all means,. save a few $$$ up front (save A LOT!) and get that lens. I bet you will never need the "L" version. There is nothing wrong with Canons more afforadable lenses.

24-80 or even the 28-90mm will serve just fine!

In fact scratch that 24-80mm "L" off your list alltogether and grab the 28-135mm IS. Many many have that as there Number one lens and it is a great starter. (definately better than the other two mentioned)

[CyberDyneSystems]

If I were to do this all over agian this is what I would do.

(assuming my own budget, personally I will NEVER own the 24-70mm "L" too pricey and not my "bag")

1. 28-135mm IS USM
2. 100-400mm IS "L"
2. B: 1.4X teleconverter
3. 17-40mm "L"
4. 70-200mm f/2.8 (Sigma or Canon ? )



In that order.

Then for me,.. because I really LOVE a loooooong lens,.. I would be looking for a 500mm or 600mm PRIME! Yep the BIG BUCKS!

[CyberDyneSystems]

P.S.

I would STILL buy my goofy Sigma 28-300mm $219.00 "SuperZoom"

It is great to have the option of an entire kit of lenses in one tiny package :D

[NILOLIGIST]

CyberDyneSystems,

I see you left out the 24-70 and added the 28-135, mind telling me why. You were just telling me to get the 24-70.

What about the 180 macro? No comment on that either.

OMG!! 500 & 600 are out of the question for me unless, I hit LOTTO!! If I hit LOTTO, I will buy you one just for answering all my questions.

NiL,

[CyberDyneSystems]

lol :)

It was just a misunderstanding on my part about what your question was,. I interpreted it as;

"These are the four lenses I am getting and I can afford them,. what order to buy them in makes the most sense? "

My mistake,. :)

The reason I pressed for that lens of your 4 is that that range of zoom is the most commonly used. Thus it makes sense to get ANY lens in that range (24-70 or 28-? ) as your first lens.

My first lens was the aforementioned 28-300mm Sigma. Dirt cheap and completely flexible. How it will fit in with a stable full of Choice "L" glass,. I don't know but for now It is the lens I can carry with me anywhere and still have a huge 300mm zoom if needed.

Any second now the pros are going to drop in hear and hang me just for mentioning that lens :D

The 180 Macro is another pricey one. What I did for macro untill I can afford a "real" macro is I bought the kenko spacer rings for $100.00

You can use these with any lens you have and they will give you tremendous close focus ability.

The advantages are price and flexibilty. If you end up with a kit of great lense,. all of them can be used for super closeups.

The disadvantage is you sacrfice depth of feild.

These extension rings have no glass in them,. they merely move the existing lens farther from the CMOS and thus alter the focal range so you can focus closer. Therefor kenko "quality" is not an issue. :)

Nil,.
many of the lense we are talking about I have never used so I have no comment.

[NILOLIGIST]

CyberDyneSystems,

Ok, understood. Well, to be honest, that list is the list of lens I am buying. I am not rich, but I am getting them. I just want to know, which I should get first. I am under the gun as far as time. I must get the 100-400 and learn it great for September, so that will be my second lens. I just can't wait so the first lens is going to be the cheaper one.

This is the order:

first lens ? could be 17-40 but that isn't a good first lens, so I might go with your choice the 28-135. This will help me budget wise but will throw my schedule off a bit. The order will stay the same.
second 100-400
third 70-200
forth not sure either 24-70 or 180 macro or try and fill the gap from the first which I am not sure of what it will be.

Boy, am I confused. I really don't want to get non-L glass but 28-135 is a good all around lens and it will fit the budget nicely. I hope I like it, I didn't like the reviews too much. But, I don't know think starting with a wide angle is good either. I just need a good starter lens....H E L P !!!!!

NiL

[CyberDyneSystems]

Here is a wacky Idea,..

Another lens that gives close to perfect photos,. and I swear everyone loves this lens!

.. is the veneranble yet humble 50mm f/1.8.

It cost $70.00 or less at B&H THATS Seventy!

If you get your 10D and bring it home with this little guy,. you will be able to take as good a photo with that lens as any other lens we mentioned. It just is not as flexible as a zoom,.

.. but image quality is as good as ,. if not better than any Zoom around for 12 times the price.

Then see where you go from there.

This will give you firm idea of focal length,. a reference point to see which direction you want or need to go with your first zoom purchase.

If you see that you need a LOT wider,. than you can follow your 17-40mm path.

You may even skip the others and go stright to the 100-400 IS? I could imagine doing that.

No matter what you decide,. this little lens is one that everyone can use. And for the cost it will be an excellent reference point that may help IMMENSELY in making your decisions about what the next Lens should be.

Good luck

:)

[NILOLIGIST]

CyberDyneSystems,

I need a all around lens, zoom or otherwise so, I have decided to go this route in this order.

28-135
100-400 + convert
70-200 L IS USM
Then, I will break and decide where to go, I will probably go this route:

24-70
180 macro
Carbon tripod
Accessories

DONE!! LOL

Now if by this time I am not happy, I never will be.

NiL,