SIGMA lenses

[SleepyArcher]

I am shopping around for lenses and would like opinions. I know DB uses the 70-200 f/2.8 (which I cant afford). Sigma makes one that is cheaper. Canon also has on without IS. What does everyone else use?

I would like one for taking pics of the kids-sports, fun etc. Wildlife. Renaissance of course. I am really getting into photography for a hobby.

[dbaldock]

If you look around at Camera and Photography Review sites & forums, it seems the general consensus is that if you're not going to buy your camera-branded lenses, then Tokina Pro series lenses are one step down as far as optical & build quality and durability.  A step below the Tokina Pro's is where you find Sigma, and then Tamron.  Many of the people whose ratings I've seen are Pro or Semi-Pro Photographers who make their living with their camera equipment, and use them "hard" daily.

I personally have, and use, some older and newer Tokina Pro Zoom lenses - as well as some older Nikkor fixed focal length lenses on my old Nikon FE2 camera bodies.  They all work well.

Take Care,
David Baldock

[AbleArcher]

I am shopping around for lenses and would like opinions. I know DB uses the 70-200 f/2.8 (which I cant afford). Sigma makes one that is cheaper. Canon also has on without IS. What does everyone else use?

I would like one for taking pics of the kids-sports, fun etc. Wildlife. Renaissance of course. I am really getting into photography for a hobby.

For sports you really need a 2.8 option.  You also need something with an internal motor (vs. the cam body driving the autofocus of the lens). 

I am pretty sure that Tokina does not offer a lens that has a High Speed Motor in it, like Sigma does.  Canon and Nikon also offer their lenses with the motors in them.

Now, you have some options here....  You can buy a Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 HSM, for about $750 or so.... The Canon version is about $1100.  Neither one offer internal stabilization. IS will not be of any use on that focal length during sports anyway.  If you're shutter speed is over 1/500, it become a moot point for the most part. 

If you are planning on shooting daylight sports, you have another option: The Canon 70-200mm f/4. it also comes in two flavors, either Stabilized or Not Stabilized.  You will pay handsomely for the IS version though.

You lose one stop of light with the f/4 version.  But, it is much smaller, and a delight to carry.  I have used all of the lenses I have mentioned.  The Nikon 70-200mm VR is my favorite, and stabilization does help alot (but I shoot more than sports with it).  The Sigma has about 90% of the image quality that the Canon or the Nikon has, so if you want to save money, go the Sigma route.  It's a fine lens.

Personally, if I was adding a tele to a Canon, it would be the 70-200mm f/4.  The IS version is about $1000, but the non -IS can be had for much much less.  It gets high marks as a very sharp, and well built lens, and I would definitley agree with that.

[SleepyArcher]

I have a rebel xti

[AbleArcher]

Here are both flavors of the 70-200mm F/4.  B&H are good to deal with.  Price is right with an instant rebate too.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?ci=0&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=jsp%2FRootPage.jsp&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t&shs=canon+70-200mm+f%2F4&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=jsp%2FRootPage.jsp&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=submit

[DeadBishop]

Unless you plan on pursuing photography professionally , from what I know you'll be using your camera for, I don't know that you necessarily need a 2.8 lens.  Seeing what I do on a daily basis, I'd put Tamron above all other third party lenses.  Tamron has a new 28-300mm IS lenses that they are billing as one of their new flagship models, that is priced at under $700.  I'm actually considering getting this lens myself if that says anything.

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/28300_vc.asp

Otherwise, get a Canon lens for that Rebel XTI of yours.  Proprietary is always the best way to go.  Now, every Sigma lens I've owned has broke on me; the autofocus has died in all 9 of them.  I don't trust them any more after that kind of track record.  Others have no problems with them, but I won't recommend them.  I've heard good things about a few newer Tokina lenses, but hear that the autofocus is somewhat slow compared to others, as the one 100-400mm zoom I have has a pretty slow autofocus.

If you can, check out some of these lenses in person and try them out for yourself to get an idea of what they can do for you.

[SleepyArcher]

thanks

[SleepyArcher]

Well I picked up a Sigma 70-200. Snapped a few pics today, its ok. I definitly need a monopod. Im going to use it for a while and see, my son has t ball next week so i will snap some then and see if its huge difference for me. i really like that tamron one too so i will have to see if i can find a store that will let me try it. i have to say its a HUGE weight difference. but so far i like it. I dont know if i will like the weight though.

[DeadBishop]

The weight of my 70-200 coupled with my camera comes to around 12 pounds.  I have bruises on my shoulders after a day at faire from where the camera strap is or when I carry the monopod on my shoulder while walking around.  As much as I love my L glass, the smaller compact lenses look really appealing after a long day of carrying that much dead weight for 14 hours.

[Friar Rohn the Chronicler]

I'm in the same boat as Deadbishop too. My previous camera was a Sony F-828 and is 3 times lighter than the stock Canon 40D. I have two lenses, a Canon EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 with the Image Stabilizer. The other is a Canon 70-200mm f2.8 that also has the Image Stabilizer. The do make older models without the stabilizer and you may save probably a chunk buying a used one off of eBay, but.... if you do a lot of indoor work without a flash, you'll need that IS function (I personally like using natural light but still use the Speedlite when needed). The f2.8 allows twice the light in and the stabilizer makes a huge difference. I do have a nice Bogen monopod that has the support poles hidden inside that can screw in and become somewhat of a emergency tripod. Several years ago I found the extremely padded strap from Eagle Creek that take the excess weight off. When I use the 200mm lens. I found a strap that is more of a "cradle" that attaches to the camera and has a cross bar the attaches to the mounting ring on the bulky telephoto. It balances the camera, but the straps can be annoying.

               

[Sicari]

I shoot a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro mainly at fest. Hopefully next week I'll have my new 70-200mm f2.8 Sig for pentax.

[Jon Foster]

I use Canon bodies and really like Canon lenses for them. I friend uses a Sigma on her new 5D and all the pictures she takes are a touch on the soft side. Don't get me wrong, the lens is better than other brands out there but she could have spent a few more bucks to get a sharper lens.

Jon.

[Xanthenes The Unbalanced]

I shoot a Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro mainly at fest. Hopefully next week I'll have my new 70-200mm f2.8 Sig for pentax.

Sicari, did you manage to obtain the Sigma 70-200mm yet?  IMO, it's the best lens Sigma's ever made.  Corner-to-corner it's just as sharp as Canon's with a lot less damage to the wallet (heck, I had enough left over to pick up my Canon 100mm macro).  While Sigma makes a few lenses I'm not a fan of (and, to be honest, Canon and Nikon also make a few lenses of questionable quality), that 70-200 is probably my favorite lens in the bag.

[Sicari]

Yea after some difficulty with firmware issues on my camera I got one and now it works. I shot the last day of MiRF with it to test it and while it is heavy I think I may have shot a new record single day total of 542 pictures. By mid day I realized it was better to wear my chainmaile camera strap with it.(I wasn't dressed) It's longer and I wear it cross body so it distributs the weight better for me.

I'm going to Md next weekend and believe it will work out well with my new armor.