Please help me with 10D lenses...

[scavenger73]

Hi to all...is my first post here and i hope will be useful...
I own a 10d srl camera and i am going to buy a zoom lens...(i own a sigma 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 yet and i know is not an excellent lens)
Now i want to buy a good quality zoom but is really a mess to decide
my choiche is between (so many eh?):
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 (not so cheap at all, i think it will be my last choiche but even considerable
Canon 70-200 f/4
Sigma 70-200 f/2.8
Sigma 100-300 f/4
The weight for me is not a problem but the one-stop difference could be..anyway if i decide for the f4 i should prefer a greater focal range so i am thinking about the sigma 100-300. The thing that worries me is that i was told to some compatibility trouble with the sigma lenses and autofocus speed, furthermore i heard that canon could perform firmware updates or other tecnichal specifications to avoid use of sigma lenses on its bodies..is it real I anticipatly thank all who can help me to solve the problem...

[ssim]

When I got my 10D I made the decision that if I was going to have that kind of investment in a Canon body I was only going to put Canon glass on it. I have not had much experience with Sigma other than swapping lenses with another photographer at a venue for just a few shots.

I have the 70-200 f/2.8L. This is a great lens and one that you wouldn't be disappointed with. It is sharp and fast. It is also expensive but you certainly wouldn't have to consider replacing it for a long time.

I have never heard anything about Canon doing a firmware change to prohibit anything but their own glass and I find that highly unlikely.

[defordphoto]

The 70-200L f2.8 IS or no IS is one of the best zoom lenses on the planet. You will have that lens for many years.

While there have been some campatibility problems with some selected Sigma lenses, Sigma has been pro-active in getting them re-programmed for proper use with Canon cameras.

Someone's been feeding you stories on Canon firmware. That's just goofy.

[DaveG]

The pain of buying a Canon 70-200 f2.8 usually ends when your significant other stops kicking your ass. After that it's bliss and it's remarkable how quickly you forget about all of those cheese sandwiches and how long you'll own this excellent lens.

It wouldn't be in Canon's interest to kill off the use of third party lenses. They are actually stronger for it. First Sigma and the rest of the boys PAY Canon for the rights to their lens mounts. They're patented and you don't get to use that for free.

Then there's the buyer's psychology of, "Well this 10D is expensive but then I can put those cheaper Sigma lenses on it." Which often translates later into. "I spent all of this money to get a good camera, why don't I have the best lenses?" But without Sigma being there BEFORE the original purchase, the buyer may well have chosen another camera brand that DID.

Finally (and I'm not quite sure that this applies) it may well be illegal to prevent a third party from providing lenses. With computer printers the manufacturers MUST allow third parties to provide inkjet refills. It would be so easy for them to patent the cartridge and then deny the use of that patent to anyone else. But they can't do it. My hesitation is that inks are a product that is a consumable and the law may well be based on that, rather than a non-consumables like a lens.

[kje_tve]

Why not also consider the 120-300 f2.8 from Sigma.

[scavenger73]

kje_tve -------------------------------------------------------------
Why not also consider the 120-300 f2.8 from Sigma.

I did..but i didn't find this lens in the original list of Sigma that i own and i don't know the price...i was told its over 2000 Euro (about 1900$) and i find really expensive considering that i am non-professional user.
If u know more..i am always here to learn..

[kje_tve]

You got the price right. It is expensive. Well you are considering the Canon 70-200 f/2.8, but perhaps the one without IS, anyway just thought I could mention it. If you by the 120-300 you get a 2.8 with great lenght, possibilites for a cheap price - extenter - to go x1.4 longer at great quality and also x2 at aleast resonable quality. The lens is a bit big an perhaps not sutiable for carrying around at all places.

[agit-prop]

Scavenger,

Have you looked at the optical quality ratings here:

http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html

According to thier ratings, the APO version of the lens you already own is not to bad. For what it's worth, their ratings categories are:

(4.26 to 5.00) = excellent ( > 4.5 = outstanding )
(3.76 to 4.25) = very good
(3.26 to 3.75) = good
(2.76 to 3.25) = average
(2.26 to 2.75) = sub-average
(1.0 to 2.25) = poor

Sigma AF 4.0-5.6 70-300mm APO Macro Super rates 3.21 (average) and is available for a fraction of a cost of Canon L series lenses. It actually rates higher than the Canon EF 5.6 100-300mm L !

If you have a bit more to spend, the Sigma EX series 100-300 and 120-300 rate as the top performers among the lenses listed in that class.

Sadly, not all of us can afford to drop a couple thousand dollars or euros on Canon L lenses. There is no shame in that however.

Oh, and as far as the potential for firmware problems with sigma lenses are concerned, that should be a non-issue with lenses produced in the last 18 months

[deztoys]

I recommend either of the Canon lenses. We have bother the F2.8 non IS and the F4, and love them both. Since buying the 10D body, my wife has also taken up photography as a hobby. She has even commented on the speed, ease and speed of focus and lack of noise in the L series versus our other lenses. Which has made life for me really nice (she doesn't need to be convinced at all when I recommend another piece of L glass.......sweet). Bottom line...go to a store that has both and let that guide your final decision. I also have a couple Sigma lenses, and have had no problems with them either. But when the the camera bag gets full and I have to leave a piece of glass at home, it tends to be the Sigma lenses.

Scott

[Canuck]

Ah, ha!
Another lens question...ok, here's my many pence...
Well, I can tell you that the 70-300 lens you have is crap of the biggest kind. I had one, and sold it for $150.
I used some of that plus some floating money to buy at that time (Aug, 03) the $1900 Sigma 120-300 F2.8 EX lens mentioned in my signature. This lens rocks! I have had absolutely no problem with it whatsoever. I highly reccommend it if you can afford it. Have a look at this one, for 2 pics taken with the Sigma lens: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=17348 and keep in mind that the one of Tenby beach is a megacompressed JPEG! In reality it is sharper than the moon pic also there. The beach pics was shot RAW and the Moon was JPEG shot, Large, Fine and at 100% as taken, no mods at all (before I discovered RAW) and the advantages to it. Note, that the first pics ever taken w/ Sigma lens were in Wales! Sidebar: Always shoot RAW, and there are 2 things I can't stress enough and people that have been around know that I say this a lot! It is that you need to get quality glass and that you need to be able to make full use of the camera. Let's tak this another direction...Let's say you have a Lotus Espirt, V8 350HP stock and put a governor on it for 75MPH. It is 286.5 kph / 178 mph capable of at top speed! There is no way in hell you will get the full enjoyment out of it! That's kinda what you're doing in JPEG mode. Ok, another example, same Lotus and you drive it like grandma, and don't drive it like the way it is designed again, you won't get the enjoyment out of it. What am I saying? Get the Lotus (in this example) and make use of its full potential, and the same is true for the 10D. Why limit it? You have all the wold to gain and have tons of fun doing so! Also, there is a fair bit more work shooting RAW, but is it ever worth it in the end! I know that there are others here on this forum that can vouch for this!

I can't speak for the Canon 70-200L lens but I'm really impressed with the Sigma one I have. They have really made a great comeback. I can't speak for it, but I have heard that the wide angle Sigma lenses aren't that great and would be better to go Canon L glass. That's why I have the Canon 16-35 F2.8L instead of Sigma in that range. Ok, so in the lower range, like 16-35 wide angle, aside from distortion at 16mm, which is correctable this lens is phenominal! If you find that the almost $1400 pricetag is too much, you could look at the L glass at F4. That will cut the price almost in half. On the flip side, the F2.8 allows you to shoot in extremely low light which I do a lot shooting sunsets down to the last ounce of light. Just more trivia, the 16-35 L lens first saw action in Ely, Cambridgeshire, England as did the 10D. You will not believe what you can get when shooting with pro glass, it really makes the difference between an ok pic and a WOW pic!

[scavenger73]

I am sorry but my doubts are still not solved....i choose to not consider the 70-200 f/2.8 not IS cause i verified is not so sharp as expected...so i can afford the problem in another way:

70-200 f2.8 sigma
70-200 f4 canon

and..if i choose to lose a stop with an f4 lens would be better the sigma 100-300 one rather than the canon one??? ???

[deztoys]

Wow.....not as sharp ? How did you verify this? I really don't question what you say, just don't know how it was verified.

Thanks.

Scott

[PaulB]

If you check the Canon MTF charts I think you might find that the non-IS 70-200/2.8 is actually slightly sharper than the IS version - or are Canon wrong again?

[hook]

My 10D would not work with my sigma 170-500 zoom,
and was told that there are no guarentees on any lens to work except cannons. It has allways preformed fine with my rebel though ,go figure.

[Canuck]

hook wrote:
My 10D would not work with my sigma 170-500 zoom,
and was told that there are no guarentees on any lens to work except cannons. It has allways preformed fine with my rebel though ,go figure.

That's odd, as in how doesn't it work?