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 17:23 |  #46

K6AZ wrote in post #13796395 (external link)
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.

No it's a fine copy. Best of 4 in that time period I had. Realize that under controlled conditions w/o harsh lighting (like your shot), one can make any lens look pretty good. Distance to subject makes a huge difference too.

Point is: it's not appropriate for one person to take a shot, show the 100% crop, and then compare to another person's crops, and make any conclusive statement. I am comparing my 2 copies at the same time and same place under same conditions and same subject distance.

I am sure you're enjoying the 17-55. I never said it's a bad lens, not at all. It's quite good. Just not as good as the Sigma. :D




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:23 |  #47

K6AZ wrote in post #13796395 (external link)
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.


Why not just admit the Sigma is a very good lens and if we are arguing this much about it the differences won't show up in real life.

At any rate, I'd rather increase my picture taking opportunities by adding an additional focal lengths rather than splitting hairs for the best of the best in one. Once you have a full kit you can pixel peep for that last 1/2 of a percent


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

  
  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 17:32 |  #48

tkbslc wrote in post #13796438 (external link)
Why not just admit the Sigma is a very good lens and if we are arguing this much about it the differences won't show up in real life.

At any rate, I'd rather increase my picture taking opportunities by adding an additional focal lengths rather than splitting hairs for the best of the best in one. Once you have a full kit you can pixel peep for that last 1/2 of a percent

The OP's body has a 18MP sensor which puts a real strain on lenses. I didn't say the Sigma was a bad lens, I said IMO the 17-55 is a better lens especially wide open. Showing 100% crops from a 10MP sensor isn't very useful for someone that has a 18MP sensor.


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 17:33 |  #49

It's better based on only your experience with the 17-55 and no experience with the Sigma?


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

  
  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 17:35 |  #50

tkbslc wrote in post #13796487 (external link)
It's better based on only your experience with the 17-55 and no experience with the Sigma?

I've shot with the Sigma 17-50 and IMO it did not hold up wide open. You have to stop down a little on it at least on the 7D.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:37 |  #51

K6AZ wrote in post #13796481 (external link)
The OP's body has a 18MP sensor which puts a real strain on lenses. I didn't say the Sigma was a bad lens, I said IMO the 17-55 is a better lens especially wide open. Showing 100% crops from a 10MP sensor isn't very useful for someone that has a 18MP sensor.

Somewhat valid point here. FWIW, the Lenstip review is based on a 50D and a 15MP sensor. And their conclusion is almost identical to my own findings using many copies of both lenses.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:38 |  #52

K6AZ wrote in post #13796497 (external link)
I've shot with the Sigma 17-50 and IMO it did not hold up wide open. You have to stop down a little on it at least on the 7D.

Did you really? :D

[Sorry, it's a pet-peeve of mine on forums when someone "claims" something without showing proof of it.]




  
  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 17:40 |  #53

LightRules wrote in post #13796505 (external link)
Somewhat valid point here. FWIW, the Lenstip review is based on a 50D and a 15MP sensor. And their conclusion is almost identical to my own findings using many copies of both lenses.

I've only shot one copy of the 17-50 and three 17-55 copies. These 18MP sensors put strain even on some Canon lenses. I know there are people with 7D bodies and the 17-50, perhaps they can post some 100% crops.

Also, as was mentioned earlier, the OP has the Sigma 30/1.4 which is an excellent lens for these sensors. I like the idea of maybe another option such as the 15-85.


Flickr (external link)

  
  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 17:43 |  #54

LightRules wrote in post #13796513 (external link)
Did you really? :D

[Sorry, it's a pet-peeve of mine on forums when someone "claims" something without showing proof of it.]

That's your business. I've posted wide open shots with the 7D/17-55. Let's see some shots with the 7D or T2i with the 17-50 wide open.


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 17:45 |  #55

I think the bit about 18MP sensors needing sharper lenses is a myth. Even if a lens could only provide 10MP worth of detail, it wouldn't be softer on an 18MP camera, just not sharper.

Regardless, this whole debate is pointless as both are good lenses, regardless of which is better. Even if the Canon is better, let's pretend we are eating dinner (it's about that time). I'd rather have an 8oz steak and a side of ribs vs just a 9 oz steak. (or some variety over a little more of one)


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:51 |  #56

K6AZ wrote in post #13796540 (external link)
That's your business. I've posted wide open shots with the 7D/17-55. Let's see some shots with the 7D or T2i with the 17-50 wide open.

Yes, and now I'd like to see your 7D and Sigma shots :D




  
  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 17:53 |  #57

tkbslc wrote in post #13796548 (external link)
I think the bit about 18MP sensors needing sharper lenses is a myth. Even if a lens could only provide 10MP worth of detail, it wouldn't be softer on an 18MP camera, just not sharper.

Regardless, this whole debate is pointless as both are good lenses, regardless of which is better. Even if the Canon is better, let's pretend we are eating dinner (it's about that time). I'd rather have an 8oz steak and a side of ribs vs just a 9 oz steak. (or some variety over a little more of one)

Regarding the sensor, TeamSpeed has done some extensive tests and posted several threads with tests and examples that pretty much match my experience. I've been through a lot of lenses.

In the end you're right and I never said the Sigma was a bad lens. I own five Sigma lenses and am not a Canon lens snob. I particularly like their primes and macros.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcowens
Member
Avatar
188 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Schenectady N.Y.
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:55 |  #58

i got the 10-20 sigma and i am very happy with it take gorgous pics love the sharpness and contrast it gives


Canon 50D Griped, Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20F/4-5.6, Canon 17-40F/4L, Canon 50F/1.4, Canon 70-200F/4L Canon 580EXii, 430EXii, Manfrotto 679B MonoPod, some old decent tripod, GaryFong, Umbrellas,Wireless flash triggers, Studio Back Drop/Flash Stands........

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stanclark
Goldmember
Avatar
1,143 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Windsor,California
     
Jan 30, 2012 17:57 |  #59

I trade my canon 17=55 because it had a loose barrel focus sucked....bought a straight canon 50 1.4, and 85 1.8l and a sigma 10-20 now I'm happy.....


So if God made Man & Woman....whats his excuse for Nikon...

  
  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 18:02 |  #60

LightRules wrote in post #13796573 (external link)
Yes, and now I'd like to see your 7D and Sigma shots :D

I'm not going to post them here. Read through my post history from late 2009 when the 7D hit the street and the various 7D post your pictures here threads. If I had to post examples of every lens I've shot over the years I'd be digging through my LR archives 24/7. Right now I actually own 34 lenses and keeping track of the ones I currently own is enough.

I've posted wide open shots from the 7D and the 17-55. If you feel the 17-50 is so much better post your shots and let the OP decide.


Flickr (external link)

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

8,377 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 mtpolice0
949 guests, 226 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.