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 21 Dec 2008 (Sunday) 23:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which "normal" prime for crop?

 
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
Avatar
9,909 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2005
     
Dec 22, 2008 20:36 |  #46

airfrogusmc wrote in post #6929685 (external link)
I gotta $20 said if you ever spent any time with the 35L you would go back.

Send me the $20. I've spent more time with these lenses it isn't even funny bw!

queenbee288 wrote in post #6929754 (external link)
It will also look real cool when that black finish starts to peel.:lol: It does happen. I have shot with the sigma 30 to test for a friend. It was ok nothing special. The 35L on the other hand is definately special.

I haven't heard any report of the 30 EX paint peeling, though I have seen Bigmas and some of their teles doing it. As for "specialness", that's totally subjective and not quantifiable in any objective manner. Many owners of many lenses, including both the 30 and 35 talk of how their lens is "special". In fact, my 30 is very special..very! :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
nadtz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,483 posts
Joined Dec 2005
     
Dec 22, 2008 20:40 |  #47

airfrogusmc wrote in post #6929498 (external link)
Its not even close and on a crop the 24L is much better than the 30...

On a crop camera, from personal experince they are close. Close being a relative measure based on the lens samples I had and what I shot, ymmv. Talking about 35L and 24L *given what the op asked for* is pointless. Yes they are worth mentioning as they are 'better' lenses, but for the average hobbyist what does the 35L or 24L give you that you wont get out of the 35/2, 30mm or other like lenses when you aren't bothering to pixel peep and are on a budget? Aside of genital wagging and a red ring not enough to warrant the price difference. If you have the money to burn or are a professional, sure that might be different, bet lets try and help the op rather than plug a party line.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,446 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5960
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Dec 22, 2008 20:44 |  #48

LightRules wrote in post #6929858 (external link)
Send me the $20. I've spent more time with these lenses it isn't even funny bw!


I haven't heard any report of the 30 EX paint peeling, though I have seen Bigmas and some of their teles doing it. As for "specialness", that's totally subjective and not quantifiable in any objective manner. Many owners of many lenses, including both the 30 and 35 talk of how their lens is "special". In fact, my 30 is very special..very! :lol:

OK show me then. SIDE BY SIDE. I've shown you 2 solid reviews and my own experience. You're saying its as good show me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 20:45 |  #49

airfrogusmc wrote in post #6929894 (external link)
OK show me then. SIDE BY SIDE. I've shown you 2 solid reviews and my own experience. You're saying its as good show me.

In case you missed it:


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nadtz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,483 posts
Joined Dec 2005
     
Dec 22, 2008 20:49 |  #50

You can send me $20 as well. For the money on a crop camera the 35L isn't worth the cost difference to me. And yes, that's after using both. I do admit I havent used the 24L, so I have nothing to say in that regard.

As for special, I felt the same about the sigma, 'special' generally isn't quantifiable and becomes fairly useless when it comes to lens testing. The 35L definitly shines, but for the money a good sigma is well worth it. Lens reviews are boring, lets go shopping!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixel_junkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,001 posts
Likes: 141
Joined May 2007
Location: Southern California
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:07 |  #51

nadtz wrote in post #6929877 (external link)
On a crop camera, from personal experince they are close. Close being a relative measure based on the lens samples I had and what I shot, ymmv. Talking about 35L and 24L *given what the op asked for* is pointless. Yes they are worth mentioning as they are 'better' lenses, but for the average hobbyist what does the 35L or 24L give you that you wont get out of the 35/2, 30mm or other like lenses when you aren't bothering to pixel peep and are on a budget? Aside of genital wagging and a red ring not enough to warrant the price difference. If you have the money to burn or are a professional, sure that might be different, bet lets try and help the op rather than plug a party line.

Want to help the OP? Mention that the SIGMA has a problem with AF when you recommend it. Take a look at a poll > HERE < more than 30% of the people who owned it had a problem with it. Over 30%! Does that sound like a solid product? And over 60% of that 30 gave up on it ... SIGMA service doesn't ALWAYS fix the problem. Again, not fair to the OP not to mention that the lens is known for AF problems.


Website (external link) | Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:10 |  #52

pixel_junkie wrote in post #6930019 (external link)
Want to help the OP? Mention that the SIGMA has a problem with AF when you recommend it. Take a look at a poll > HERE < more than 30% of the people who owned it had a problem with it.

Obviously you haven't taken a statistics course.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixel_junkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,001 posts
Likes: 141
Joined May 2007
Location: Southern California
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:14 |  #53

Tony-S wrote in post #6930036 (external link)
Obviously you haven't taken a statistics course.

Whatever that means ... The numbers are there, do the math.


Website (external link) | Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:16 |  #54

It means your sample is not random. Without random sampling you cannot estimate statistical relevance to the population.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixel_junkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,001 posts
Likes: 141
Joined May 2007
Location: Southern California
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:27 |  #55

Tony-S wrote in post #6930063 (external link)
It means your sample is not random. Without random sampling you cannot estimate statistical relevance to the population.

That is right Tony. It is a random poll with a random group of people taken at a random time. That is all it is, you chose if it is worth anything to you or not. But I bet you anything that if I take the same poll a month from now and then 3 months from now, the results are going to be very similar to the one I did. The lens has a problem, and that is a fact so it should be mentioned. Are you saying that it doesn't have a problem which is well documented within this forum? If you do, I have nothing more to say, this is pointless ...


Website (external link) | Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 21:40 |  #56

pixel_junkie wrote in post #6930110 (external link)
That is right Tony. It is a random poll with a random group of people taken at a random time. That is all it is, you chose if it is worth anything to you or not.

No, it isn't random. It is fraught with sample bias. When we want to check prevalence of a virus infection in a community, we don't ask people to come in and give us a sample because it only attracts those with strong feeling about the disease (i.e., "Oh, I think I had that disease. I should go get checked."). We take samples from the blood bank and they are randomized. This is how it was determined that four of five people infected with West Nile virus didn't even know it - it's asymptomatic in 80% of those infected.

Here you have the same issue. On top of that, your sample only includes Canon users. It doesn't take into account lens lot numbers. It doesn't take into account camera model numbers. There are lots of issues with "polls" like these. They're fun, and they can be enlightening sometimes, but they generally have little scientific merit.

But I bet you anything that if I take the same poll a month from now and then 3 months from now, the results are going to be very similar to the one I did. The lens has a problem, and that is a fact so it should be mentioned.

All lenses have problems. If you did the same kind of poll asking if the EF 50mm f/1.4 is sharp wide open, you'd find 80% of people saying "yes". But if you look at the images in archive that are shot at f/1.4 you'll see that the great majority are not sharp at f/1.4.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 22:06 |  #57

I appreciate the responses and I am glad I could start a healthy debate. I especially appreciate those of you that actually read my original post. As much as I'd like the 35L (or 24L) It isn't happening in this decade. For the 35L's $1150 price tag, I could get a 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 30/1.4 and have some left over. Or I could upgrade my body to a 40D and still get the prime I asked about in the opening post.

It is probably down to the 35/2 at this point. I could probably stretch for the 30/1.4, but I also want to buy some lighting this winter.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Dec 22, 2008 22:07 |  #58

Tony.... Not a fair comparison..... is it sharp is a relative term and subjective. Does it have a problem and needed to be fixed and was it fixed is somewhat more definitve.

I would imagine Photozone's test sample was one of those that would have needed repairing, since their test sample was less than impressive. Actually pretty horrible, imo.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stealthy ­ Ninja
Cream of the Crop
14,387 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Mythical Tasmania (the one with lots of tall buildings in the semi-tropics, A.K.A. Hong Kong)
     
Dec 22, 2008 22:15 |  #59
bannedPermanent ban

tkbslc wrote in post #6930346 (external link)
I appreciate the responses and I am glad I could start a healthy debate. I especially appreciate those of you that actually read my original post. As much as I'd like the 35L (or 24L) It isn't happening in this decade. For the 35L's $1150 price tag, I could get a 85/1.8, 50/1.4, 30/1.4 and have some left over. Or I could upgrade my body to a 40D and still get the prime I asked about in the opening post.

It is probably down to the 35/2 at this point. I could probably stretch for the 30/1.4, but I also want to buy some lighting this winter.

I researched this a while back and I wanted to get the Sigma 30mm. But the fact it doesn't go on a FF camera kept keeping me from buying one.

Right now, I don't know what I would buy if I wanted a "normal" crop body lens. I think I'd probably go for the 28mm Canon because it gives a bit more cropping room, better build quality and ring USM.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony-S
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,903 posts
Likes: 204
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
     
Dec 22, 2008 22:16 |  #60

bohdank wrote in post #6930349 (external link)
Tony.... Not a fair comparison..... is it sharp is a relative term and subjective. Does it have a problem and needed to be fixed and was it fixed is somewhat more definitve.

My point is that bias is always a potential issue with polling. You can even add "was the lens properly used" to the equation. As you know, shooting at f/1.4 can be tricky. A sharp lens can be misinterpreted as soft because of such user problems.


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

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

6,219 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which "normal" prime for crop?
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 mrbarnard
930 guests, 343 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.