best 3rd party zoom for canon 5dmkII?

bomberman

bomberman

Messages
1,149
Edit My Images
No
is there a good alternative to the canon 24-70? I'm aware of the sigma 24-70 but from the reviews it dosen't seem to fair too well on the 5dmkII, are there any others?
 
Don't skimp on the glass when you have 20mp+ to feed. Go for the Canon.
 
+1 :thumbs:
 
thing is i could probably afford a 5d2 at the moment but another £700 on glass is out of the question. you would think that someone might have filled this rather large gap in the market
 
The best sensors simply need the best glass. Look for a 28-70 instead.
 
Seems little point in spending all that money on a good camera and compromising it by getting cheap glass.....may be better to go for a lower spec camera and getting the better lens?
 
Brachytron said:
Don't skimp on the glass when you have 20mp+ to feed. Go for the Canon.
Click to expand...
Well .... the pixel density on the 5D Mk II is actually lower than on the OP's 40D. So the new body wouldn't be taxing the lens as far as central sharpness is concerned.

On the other hand, the full frame sensor is tons bigger than a crop, and you might want a lens that delivers sharpness all the way into the corners. If that's the case then you need to spend the money. But for some applications (eg portraiture) you might not care about corner sharpness very much ... I guess it depends what you plan to use the camera for.
 
bomberman said:
thing is i could probably afford a 5d2 at the moment but another £700 on glass is out of the question. you would think that someone might have filled this rather large gap in the market
Click to expand...

I don't see a gap. Canon make a perfectly good 24-70, but you pay for the quality. If you want cheaper, as already mentioned Sigma has it's own offering, but it isn't as good as the Canon.

As far as lenses go, as a generalisation you get what you pay for. I know there are a few notable exceptions - the nifty fifty performs well for the price, but the low cost does show up in other areas; build quality and slow/noisy to focus.

If it was feasible to fill that gap with a low cost lens that wasn't utter pants in use, I am sure someone would have done it by now.
 
The 5D will recognise a Canon lens, and can make allowances, especially in the corners. Using a non Canon lens will give you lower quality pictures. Peripheral Illumination Correction is the full name. Why settle for lower quality when using full frame?
 
Before i moved to Full Frame i made sure my lens line up was fully compatible. As suggeted invest in lenses first. This way when you do move to FF you are not restricted to what lens you can use without compramise. Infact the only lens i couldnt use with FF was my UWA 10-22mm which i pretty much traded fora 17-40 as they were the same price at the time.
 
mickledore said:
The 5D will recognise a Canon lens, and can make allowances, especially in the corners. Using a non Canon lens will give you lower quality pictures. Peripheral Illumination Correction is the full name. Why settle for lower quality when using full frame?
Click to expand...

Not completely true.

It is true that DPP recognises canon lenses and automatically can apply the right amount of PIC for the given lens at the given focal length and aperture, but you can do this yourself in processing in other programs like PS.
 
Tamron do a 28-75mm f2.8 that seems to have its fans.
 
the sigma is a good lens! not as good as the canon but no slouch.
 
good_fella7777 said:
With such strong sentiments, i wonder if Sigma 24-70 actually sells!!
Click to expand...

I've no doubt that some lenses are better than others and it's always nice to buy the best at the price we're willing to pay but I suspect that in reality if faced with example shots most of us wouldn't be able to say which shot was taken with which lens.
 
I'm no expert but I had a lens that just was not performing and had to upgrade. I had the choice of the Sigma or the Canon 24-70mm.....I could afford the Canon but being a cheapskate I was naturally inclined to-wards the Sigma. However, in the end,and after much deliberation, I went for the Canon as I would always have that little doubt in my mind "would the Canon have done better".......

That said, all the reviews pointed to the Sigma being a very good lens.
 
I've seen some stunning images come from a 5d2 with the siggy lens, but my 24-70 L is found on my 5d2 for the majority of the time.

Siggy do make some fine optics, i favoured the 70-200 f2.8 over the canon non IS version and it's never given me cause to regret it, especially as I have the Canon IS version in the house to compare it to.
 
bomberman said:
thing is i could probably afford a 5d2 at the moment but another £700 on glass is out of the question. you would think that someone might have filled this rather large gap in the market
Click to expand...

It's that age old scenario - you can 'afford' the body but if you want to get the benefit of your outlay - you really need to be able to afford the lenses on top.
 
woof woof said:
Tamron do a 28-75mm f2.8 that seems to have its fans.
Click to expand...

No its crop only for that lens. If Tamron lens is designated Di then its designed for crop sensors.

If your going to do some portraits you could grab the 85mm F1.8, its a cracking lens, a good focal length for portraits on FF and an EF lens so will work fine with it, can be picked up for about 1/2 the price of the L and is sharp as a tack.

I use mine on a crop, but its one I wont part with should I go FF.
 
iancandler said:
No its crop only for that lens. If Tamron lens is designated Di then its designed for crop sensors.

If your going to do some portraits you could grab the 85mm F1.8, its a cracking lens, a good focal length for portraits on FF and an EF lens so will work fine with it, can be picked up for about 1/2 the price of the L and is sharp as a tack.

I use mine on a crop, but its one I wont part with should I go FF.
Click to expand...

Thats not correct - the Tamron 28-75mm is FF compatible, i had one on my 5D2 for many months then i got a Canon 24-70mm, i compared the IQ as i had both len's at the same time and there was very little difference, it was very difficult to tell at anything less than 100% but the Canon is sharper around the outer edges, the main improvement is focus speed which is much much quicker on the 24-70mm.
 
well the only lens i have that's FF compatible at the moment is the 50mm, i'm planning on getting the 85mm 1.8 for a while and i've tried it on a 5d2 and was pretty impressed (loads less C.A than the 85mm 1.2 i tried alongside it). i just don't think i could survive on primes. I'd probably get an 17-40 because i love the UWA and have a 10-20 which i use a lot, but if the siggy 24-70 isn't a complete dog i'd probably get that. i've got a 17-70 for my crop camera but i don't use it enough to justify an expensive replacement. so thinking about it i'll probably go for:

sigma 24-70
canon 85mm 1.8
canon 50mm 1.8
canon 17-40

Maybe i'm being greedy and should just use the canon 50mm 1.8! I can imagine it takes on a whole new perspective on FF
 
iancandler said:
No its crop only for that lens. If Tamron lens is designated Di then its designed for crop sensors.
Click to expand...

Di is fine on FF sensors, it's the very differently labelled "Di II" that will only work on crop :bang: :D

I use a Sigma 24-70 on my 5DII, it's not the best performer, but at 1/4 of the price of the Canon I can hardly expect it to be! Contrast is lacking a little, but that's easily fixed afterwards. Focus speed and accuracy is o.k, except in low light where it is noticeably worse than a L lens, but if you expect it, you can adapt to it.

I'm saving for a Canon 24-70, but it's not at the top of my list! :)
 
Check this out on eBay. Item number 220707131965

Could be just what you're looking for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top