Confused about "digital" lenses

[sidster]

Greetings all... My very first post :)

I just got my 20D (last week) and been playing with it some.
I have a few lenses to keep me entertained for now as I have
owned an EOS A2 for the past 7 or 8 years now (I think?).

I'm interested in buying a non-prime lens to allow for some
decent wide-angle shots. I want something wider than my
Sigma 28-200mm. The first lens that caught my attention
was the Sigma 17-35mm f2.8-4.0 EX DG (appx. $400). But
then I saw the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC (appx. $250).

The price for the 18-125 is so attractive that I was almost
convinced to buy it especially after viewing some sample
shots on photoSIG (http://www.photosig.com/) teken by this lens.

The only problem is the "DC" (digital camera only). As I think
about this, the more bothered I get about it. Things like What
if I upgrade to a full-frame sensor camera body someday? or
What if I want to go shoot film with my A2?

So I wanted to know what are the thoughts and feelings of
others who also have probably gone through similar decision
making thought process.

--patrick

[tim]

Full frame sensors will come down to the 20D price point, but I think it'll be at least 3-5 years away myself. "Digital" lenses are smaller and lighter, which is very handy, and you can always resell them in 5 years if you upgrade to a full frame SLR. I guess you have to trade off the factors yourself.

Personally i'm buying mid priced lenses at the moment, $200-$400, and I figure if I upgrade to a full frame sensor i'll be able to afford to get higher quality lenses.

[DocFrankenstein]

did you consider 12-24 sigma ? :?:

[scottbergerphoto]

IMHO you buy into a camera system, accumulate a good group of lenses, and change bodies to suit your needs. The "digital" lenses developed by Tamron and Sigma are designed to cost you money and make them money. If you move up to a larger sensor, their useless.
Scott

[sidster]

did you consider 12-24 sigma ? :?:

That lens is a very nice one; however, a bit pricy for me
(right now) at about $550.

I think I will be getting the 17-35mm f2.8-4.0 EX DG and
will avoid the "for digital" lenses.

Thanks for all inputs :)

--patrick

[Vita Rara]

The "digital" lenses developed by Tamron and Sigma are designed to cost you money and make them money. If you move up to a larger sensor, their useless.

I'm not sure that this is an accurate statement. For example isn't the Tamrom 28-75 Di a full frame lens. I think you have a situation where everyone is slapping "digital" on everything for marketing purposes. You need to examine each lens/item to see if it is a piece that would be crippled and worthless as you upgrade or is really a perfectly fine item that has "digital" slapped on for marketing reasons.

Mark

[scottbergerphoto]

The "digital" lenses developed by Tamron and Sigma are designed to cost you money and make them money. If you move up to a larger sensor, their useless.

I'm not sure that this is an accurate statement. For example isn't the Tamrom 28-75 Di a full frame lens. I think you have a situation where everyone is slapping "digital" on everything for marketing purposes. You need to examine each lens/item to see if it is a piece that would be crippled and worthless as you upgrade or is really a perfectly fine item that has "digital" slapped on for marketing reasons.

Mark
It's not clear how well these lenses will perform on a full or near full frame DSLR.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-nov-04.shtml
Scott

[Jesper]

The "digital" lenses developed by Tamron and Sigma are designed to cost you money and make them money. If you move up to a larger sensor, their useless.

I'm not sure that this is an accurate statement. For example isn't the Tamrom 28-75 Di a full frame lens. I think you have a situation where everyone is slapping "digital" on everything for marketing purposes. You need to examine each lens/item to see if it is a piece that would be crippled and worthless as you upgrade or is really a perfectly fine item that has "digital" slapped on for marketing reasons.

Mark

Yes - just because the word "digital" is in the description of the lens doesn't necessarily mean that it can only be used on 1.6x crop factor cameras. You need to examine if that's really the case or not. Some manufacturers call their lenses "optimized for digital cameras" because they're using slightly different coatings that are supposed to be especially good the way digital cameras work.

Sigma DC lenses have a limited imaging circle, which means you cannot use them on a full-frame camera - just like Canon EF-S lenses, which don't even physically fit on a full-frame camera, because the mount is slightly different. I think (not sure) that Sigma DC lenses do physically fit on a full-frame EOS body, but you'll get a round, black border in the image.

All my 5 EOS lenses are full-frame. I would definitely hestitate to buy a non-full-frame lens, but the Canon EF-S 17-85 IS would be an awfully nice lens if I'd have a 20D....

[ToddMorris]

The "digital" lenses developed by Tamron and Sigma are designed to cost you money and make them money. If you move up to a larger sensor, their useless.

I'm not sure that this is an accurate statement. For example isn't the Tamrom 28-75 Di a full frame lens. I think you have a situation where everyone is slapping "digital" on everything for marketing purposes. You need to examine each lens/item to see if it is a piece that would be crippled and worthless as you upgrade or is really a perfectly fine item that has "digital" slapped on for marketing reasons.

Mark
It's not clear how well these lenses will perform on a full or near full frame DSLR.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-nov-04.shtml
Scott

Hi Mark,

After reading the article in the link you provided, I'm confused as to how you arrived at such an umbiguously negative perception of these lenses as your initial statement would seem to indicate ?

The article you linked to actually seems to recommend one of the Tamrom lenses ... and while Mr Johnson may not explicitly recommend these lenses for full frame sensors, in the P.S of the article hes does say: "Reader David Greenberg points out that I've been ambiguous about what the Tamron 17-35mm Di can be used for. It is not limited to APS-sized sensors, and can be used on full-frame 35mm film cameras as well"

As someone who is new to DSLR, I certainly appreciate a forum such as this, and the the opportunity to learn from more experienced photographers such as yourself.

However, I guess when reading, I'll just have to get used the fact that at times it seems people can be a little quick and loose with their opinions ... especially when it comes to their favored equipment brands :D

Just my 2 pennies.

Thanks,
Todd

[Vita Rara]

After reading the article in the link you provided, I'm confused as to how you arrived at such an umbiguously negative perception of these lenses as your initial statement would seem to indicate?

Todd,

I think you've mis-attributed the "negative perception." I think some of the digital lenses that are out there would be fine on a full frame censor. We just need to see full frame tests of these lenses.

Mark

[scottbergerphoto]

We just need to see full frame tests of these lenses.

Mark
Exactly.
Scott

[pcasciola]

I believe the original question here are lenses that are specifically for 1.6x sensors, not the lens that are just "optimized" for digital, which probably just means they have the special lens coating that reduces the excessive flaring that non-coated lenses are prone to on digital cameras. The original post was about the Sigma 18-125mm DC. Sigma DC lenses cannot be used on non APS-C camera, or severe vignetting will occur. DC is the equivalent of Canon's EF-S, and Tamron's Di-II (not Di which are full frame lens "optimized" for digital use). EF-S, Di-II and DC are specifically designed for APS-C sized sensors. I saw a review somewhere of a brave soul who modified an EF-S lens and shot it with a 1D or 1Ds, and the outer 1/3rd of the image was black. I imagine this is the same thing that will happen with a Sigma DC or Tamron Di-II.

I've been struggling with the same dilemma. I need super wide angle for my 20D, so do I buy the Canon 10-22mm EF-S or upcoming Tamron 11-18mm Di-II which will only work on APS-C cameras, or settle for the Sigma 12-24mm so I can use it on a 1D Mk II or other 1.3x or full frame camera in the future?

[Cadwell]

However, I guess when reading, I'll just have to get used the fact that at times it seems people can be a little quick and loose with their opinions ... especially when it comes to their favored equipment brands :D



You mean the chants of "Canon, Canon, Canon"? Nah, not here, surely? :shock: . I've never been to forum where people are more objective than this one :lol:

[Cadwell]

My take on this whole debate is that I would never buy one of the APS-C limited lenses, so that would leave out Canon EF-S, Tamron Di-II and Sigma DC lenses. Mainly because I have a 1.6 and 1.3 crop factor camera.

I would have no problem in buying some of the manufacturers "digital optimised" lenses like the Tamron Di and the Sigma DGs. In fact I have a Tamron Di and it works great.

I have to say that it's all getting a little confusing though. Tamron with Di and Di-II designation, Canon with EF and EF-S, Sigma with DG and DC...

[Roy NN7DX]

I bought a used Sigma 70-300 APO Super Macro II lenses as new last year... It had very bad "ghosting" of light objects in bright lighting... BAD!

Returned it to Sigma... The coating on the rear lens was not suppressing reflections from the sensor! It would have been fine with film but the reflectivity of the CMOS assembly in my Canon messed it up...

After only 4 months they sent a new upgraded lens of that same exact model in which the rear lens coatings now attenuate virtually all DSLR sensor reflections by almost 100%...

This model of full frame lens is now upgraded with coatings that allow it to perform well with a digital DSLR... There is probably a lot of this kind of tweaking going on among all lens makers to keep their current models of full frame film lenses perking along with DSLR's

I know as a fact Sigma made this production change to the Red Ring SuperMac II without having a whole dog and pony show about this mid-production upgrade... Perhaps Sigma didn't want a few thousand film shooters pissing and moaning about changing their lenses out because of a problem they would never have if they continued to shoot film...

I will pay attention when a new "variation" of an older 35mm lens makes a big deal of revision as a digital lens... Was there a problem before?

[tim]

I bought a used Sigma 70-300 APO Super Macro II lenses as new last year... It had very bad "ghosting" of light objects in bright lighting... BAD!


I got that lens today... based on my very brief experience unless you need 300mm zoom in bright light i'd go for the 70-200 2.8 IS. The Sigma works fine on a tripod or in bright light... I guess that's what you get for $209.