Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 29 Jan 2012 (Sunday) 20:50
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2 Sigmas or 1 Canon?

 
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:02 |  #31

K6AZ wrote in post #13795965 (external link)
Sorry, I don't put much credence in that site. I'm not going to go off topic and explain why here but anyone that cares to can do a little digging. Review sites are not 'facts'.

By the way, I'm far from a Sigma basher. I own five Sigma lenses. But the 17-50 in the real world does not outperform the 17-55. A friend of mine owns one and it is not a bad lens but head to head with the 17-55 on a 7D body it was pretty clear the 17-55 was better particularly wide open.

Again, my take on these 2 lenses.

Lenstip review and comments on the two lenses in question and conclusion (external link).

And a few center shots between my former 17-55 and my current 17-50, all f2.8:

Canon 17mm

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Sigma 17mm
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Canon 55mm
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Sigma 50mm
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Another example, in harsh lighting, wide open...

Canon 55mm
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Sigma 50mm
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'


Again all my thoughts and comments are posted at the above link after having used over 30 copies of the Canon and owning 2 for several years. Loved the lens, but moved to a better one with the Sigma. It's sharpness and micro-contrast is simply better, along with its CA and flare performance. Not slamming the Canon, just the facts. If the Canon were better I'd still own it.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:05 |  #32

shoenberg3 wrote in post #13795984 (external link)
Review sites are not facts, but their results are "facts."

Facts does not equate to conclusions, of course, but I would place more credence on these controlled tests rather purely anecdotal accounts.

Sorry, but no matter what you call it that site and anything on it is not a fact.

You even conceded the same issue most of these third party f/2.8 zooms have, being soft wide open. What's the point of buying a f/2.8 lens if it's soft wide open? This is the same argument when it comes to FF, there have been endless threads about how the Tamron 28-75 is just as good as the Canon 24-70/28-70.

The bottom line is that in user reviews the Canon 17-55 rates significantly higher than the Sigma 17-50. It's nearly a full point higher over on FM on a scale of 1-10.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shoenberg3
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Mar 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:14 |  #33

Ridiculous. The numbers from lenstip and PZ are both FACTS. They are not conclusions about the lenses, but they are nonetheless facts, unless they are flat out lying about their numbers (very unlikely).
They are much more objective than user anecdotes based on a single copy of the lenses. Plus, there are previous users of these two lenses who are claiming the exact opposite of what you are saying on this very thread. So on neither counts (user anecdote and tests by reviewers) do you have an edge.

FM reviews are likewise very unreliable: a single bad experience (a bad copy) could really bring down the rating. Just for illustration, a lens with ratings of 9 9 9 9 9 and 2 would have a lower rating than that with 8 8 8 8 8 8 .


Buy prints of my photographs at Redbubble -> shoenberg3 | Redbubble (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:19 |  #34

shoenberg3 wrote in post #13795439 (external link)
I would probably do this instead though:

SIgma 10-22, Sigma 24-70.

I think I'd go 8-16mm HSM and 17-50mm OS HSM.


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shoenberg3
Senior Member
466 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Mar 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:22 |  #35

That is another option that would be interesting. 8mm rectilinear, that is just sick wide, even on crop..


Buy prints of my photographs at Redbubble -> shoenberg3 | Redbubble (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:22 |  #36

K6AZ wrote in post #13796059 (external link)
Sorry, but no matter what you call it that site and anything on it is not a fact.

You even conceded the same issue most of these third party f/2.8 zooms have, being soft wide open. What's the point of buying a f/2.8 lens if it's soft wide open? This is the same argument when it comes to FF, there have been endless threads about how the Tamron 28-75 is just as good as the Canon 24-70/28-70.

The bottom line is that in user reviews the Canon 17-55 rates significantly higher than the Sigma 17-50. It's nearly a full point higher over on FM on a scale of 1-10.

You seem to have conveniently ignored both my and Lightrules' posts.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nccb
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
425 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:30 |  #37

Tony-S wrote in post #13796131 (external link)
I think I'd go 8-16mm HSM and 17-50mm OS HSM.

Ah, yes. Thought about it, but that gets me up to around $1400. My $1100 is already pushing it.

....but haven't ruled it out....


5D3 | 24-105mm L | 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:32 |  #38

Sirrith wrote in post #13796142 (external link)
You seem to have conveniently ignored both my and Lightrule's posts.

Don't you know? Sometimes facts are stupid things (external link). ;)


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 201
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:33 |  #39

nccb wrote in post #13796189 (external link)
Ah, yes. Thought about it, but that gets me up to around $1400. My $1100 is already pushing it.

....but haven't ruled it out....

I'd say it'd be worth that extra $300. I have the full-frame equivalents, 12-24mm HSM and 24-70mm HSM (though no OS).


"Raw" is not an acronym, abbreviation, nor a proper noun; thus, it should not be in capital letters.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:35 |  #40

Tony-S wrote in post #13796203 (external link)
Don't you know? Sometimes facts are stupid things (external link). ;)

Ah, but stupid doesn't mean wrong :)

nccb wrote in post #13796189 (external link)
Ah, yes. Thought about it, but that gets me up to around $1400. My $1100 is already pushing it.

....but haven't ruled it out....

One thing to consider with the 8-16 is the difficulty of using filters with it if you intend to do landscape photography or use a CPL.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:52 |  #41

Sirrith wrote in post #13796142 (external link)
You seem to have conveniently ignored both my and Lightrules' posts.

I've read the posts here. Rather than going back and forth how about we post wide open f/2.8 shots with the EXIF intact?

Here are shots from the JPGs generated from the 7D. I've only resized the first one and cropped the second one in Irfanview.

First, the entire frame @ 55mm:

IMAGE: http://www.k6az.com/temp/IMG_6275a.jpg

Crop near the center. This is a 100% crop from the 7D:

IMAGE: http://www.k6az.com/temp/IMG_6275b.jpg

Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nccb
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
425 posts
Joined Aug 2011
     
Jan 30, 2012 16:57 as a reply to  @ K6AZ's post |  #42

Hold on let me grab some popcorn....


5D3 | 24-105mm L | 85mm 1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:02 |  #43

K6AZ wrote in post #13796312 (external link)
I've read the posts here. Rather than going back and forth how about we post wide open f/2.8 shots with the EXIF intact?

I must admit I'm rather confused. If you did indeed read the posts, you'll know I don't have either of those lenses, and you'll have seen the images with EXIF intact posted by Lightrules, so what exactly are you wanting?


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
K6AZ
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,250 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 9
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Richmond VA USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:10 |  #44

Sirrith wrote in post #13796362 (external link)
I must admit I'm rather confused. If you did indeed read the posts, you'll know I don't have either of those lenses, and you'll have seen the images with EXIF intact posted by Lightrules, so what exactly are you wanting?

I'd like to see more examples, especially shot with the 7D. His shots with the 17-55 seem to be very soft for that lens, at least compared to the three different copies I've used.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:21 |  #45

With the 30mm f1.4 in the mix, do you really need an f2.8 zoom around it? How about a 15-85?


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,435 views & 0 likes for this thread
2 Sigmas or 1 Canon?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is persie Sindhu
949 guests, 335 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.