Recommended zoon lenses for film use?

[Mitja Popovski]

The tamron above does not feel cheap and plastic, but yes lots of tamrons do feel like that

[Shaun Walker]

I am VERY intrigued to see how a Sigma 18-250 (or the less interesting Canon 18-135) performs in good light and low ISOs for 1080HD versus my 16-25,70-200 2.8, and 100-400 L-series zooms, an compared to my 50mm 1.4.
For still shooting and high-res/big, the sharpness, etc. difference will be obvious and the high-end glass will be quite superior, but for video, I wonder ...

Will it make only relatively minor difference, to the point where there won't be much hesitation in putting the 13.8X zoom on the camera when there's enough light? I'll report back in this forum on that when I get my 7D and 18-250 :)

One big bummer, could even steer me away from getting the lens:
I've read the Sigma is a vari-focal design ... the focus changes as you zoom :( !

I wonder if the 18-135 Canon is, too?

[Brian Parker]

I have 2 zooms:
sigma 24-70mm 2.8
sigma 50-150mm 2.8 DC (EF-S only)

and I will buy the canon 7d when it comes out and use it straight away for a project. I want to go wider than the 24 on my widest lens, and so now I'm thinking that I should for one of the following:

EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM

I'm kind of stuck about which one I should get. I'm leaning towards the sigma because for some of my locations the wider the better. Also I have some of the range of the canon covered by my other lenses (and at f/2.8).

The only thing I'm hesitant on is the IS on the canon lens. Do you think that at 15mm would the IS give me an extra stop to play with? I'm thinking that it wouldn't since the IS would only really allow me to slow the shutter speed down a bit, but with video that wouldnt really be a possibility would it? (1/60 would kind of be my wall wouldnt it)

[Shaun Walker]

Maybe sell the Sigma 24-70 and "make do" a sweet Canon 17-55 2.8 IS USM, Brian? Then later on get a wider zoom or maybe there will be an affordable 1.6x crop specific super wide 2/2.8 prime someday in the not-so-distant future ... Probably is more like it, as the Sigma 30mm 1.4 would indicate. Late this year or possibly next year? Who knows ...

[Alastair Brown]

OK, so if you were on a budget, then maybe?

Sigma 30mm 1.4
Tokina 11-16 2.8
Tamron 17-50 2.8 (the new VC version due soon)
Sigma 70-200 2.8

What say you?

And if you wanted to build up then maybe go:-

1-Tamron 17-50 2.8 (the new VC version due soon)
2-Sigma 70-200 2.8
3-Tokina 11-16 2.8
4-Sigma 30mm 1.4

[Shaun Walker]

Looks reasonable and covers things, nicely, Alastair.

But I would maybe say a Canon 17-55 2.8 either way just because that would be the main lens on the camera much of the time for many people, and the higher quality and durability would be worth the not-huge extra money in the long and even medium term. And if you shoot stills, its USM focusing is likely to be superior to the Tamron's AF.

Also: A used 50mm 1.8 Canon can be found for cheap and still be a good budget low light lens, esp. until you get a 1.4/2? 30mm or wider someday.

And:
5-High-quality Kenko/Tamron "Pro" 2x converter
Canon's pricey one has element extending in front that makes it only usable with their longer telephoto primes and a few tele zooms?, but the above would work with anything, and make the 30mm into a close-focusing 60mm 2.8?

[Roberto Lanczos]

Any thoughts on the sigma 18-50/2.8?

[Alastair Brown]

Originally Posted by Roberto Lanczos

Any thoughts on the sigma 18-50/2.8?

I think this link covers all the lenses we have discussed.

All Tests / Reviews

[Shaun Walker]

Sigma sounds sharp from a few user reviews I've seen, but it has NO Image Stabilization :(

[Alastair Brown]

And on the subject of Image Stabilization. I am sure this will be of interest.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-eo...ifference.html