Is this lens any good for general use

Raptor Mike

Raptor Mike

Messages
2,812
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
I have three lenses at the moment, a Tamron 17-50 f2.8, a Canon 55-250, and a Sigma 150-500. Since I bough the sigma the Canon doesn't get used much anymore. I have also had a lot of situations where the Tamron just doesn't reach. So I'm looking for something with a bit more of a range for day's out and stuff like a bit of judo photography (I took some of a judo competition and the Tamron didn't get close enough and the Canon was too close). Then I would sell my Canon.

So is this Sigma any good? Or can you recommend something better. This isn't a lens I want to spend loads of money on, but it's got to be a reasonably good lens.
http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-sigma-18-200-f3-5-6-3-ii-dc-os-hsm-canon-fit/p1527722#details

Many thanks, Mike
 
Last edited:
First question is there enough light at Judo comps to use an aperture such as f3.5? To also keep up the shutter speed?
 
;Thanks all for the replies and suggestions :thumbs
Tintin124 said:
First question is there enough light at Judo comps to use an aperture such as f3.5? To also keep up the shutter speed?
Click to expand...
I was having trouble with light using the Tamron which is f2.8 throughout so had to wack up the ISO. So probably not. But the judo will be a small part of it's use TBH. It's a shame we cant use flash.

pingu666 said:
consider a 85-128mm prime, maybe a macro
Click to expand...
85mm won't be wide enough for general use. The Canon is 55-250 and doesn't go wide enough. The link to the second lens I put is the same Sigma but it's a macro. I assume this means you can use it as normal but also very close?

andrewc said:
would a secondhand Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 be a better bet?
Click to expand...
As above, 50mm isn't wide enough.

Edit:
When I say a bit more of a range I mean to cover a lager range of mm, not as in long distance. Sorry I should have explained better.
 
Last edited:
Trouble is with these 'superzooms', they're OK if you want to travel comparatively light on holiday, but are comparatively slow in aperture terms. I would imagine judo comps are generally held indoors in venues with poor lighting, so you need to keep shutter speed high.

Macro, and its probably not true macro, means it will have a fairly close minimum focus, but I wouldn't want to shoot sports with one unless outdoors on a bright summers day.
 
The superzoom is f/6.3 at the long end, contrast that to your current f/2.8 and you've lost 2.3 stops - that's the equivalent of going from 1/500 shutter speed (perfectly good for most situations) to 1/100 (if my drunk maths is correct) which will be too slow.

In reality what you want doesn't really exist as any superzoom will have a slow aperture which simply won't cut the mustard indoors. This is why f/2.8 zooms only come in limited ranges (classically 28-70 and 70-200 for full frame or 18-50 and 50-150 for DX) and why you would need to change lenses. Or, why lots of pros carry two bodies.
 
I used a version of the Sigma 18-200mm OS on a business trip to Singapore for the Grand Prix in 2011 (long story, but I couldn't take my own kit). The Sigma was OK, but it was no better than that.
 
Okay so lets forget about the judo. What about for normal use eg days out without taking two lenses? Or am I better off taking two lenses and a belt pouch or something?
 
The other point being is that you are used to the image quality of the Tamron f/2.8 and the Sigma will definitely be inferior.
 
I tend to think that if you a buying a superzoom, it needs to be more expensive than buying the equivalent two lens solution.

The more you cram in, the more the compromise so you need fancy glass and clever design to make up for it, neither of these are cheap.

Don't get me wrong, I use a Superzoom on my D610, the Nikon 28-300 but that is a pretty expensive lens and I am paying for the convenience. I wouldn't use a cheap alternative.
 
my dad has a tamron 18-270 and ive used a 28 to 200 or something old one, and there ok, images tend towards meh

you could look on dyxum at user reviews
 
It'll have to wait a while, WEX have a pre-loved one but its £350. I recon I'd get around £80 for the canon.

Also that 50-150 would work well with my 150-500 for zoo photography :)

Thanks guys.
 
Last edited:
One more thought, what about a 2X tele converter? If I got a Canon one would I still keep the auto focus and the f2.8 with the Tamron 17-50mm? Then I'd get 34-100mm.
 
Raptor Mike said:
One more thought, what about a 2X tele converter? If I got a Canon one would I still keep the auto focus and the f2.8 with the Tamron 17-50mm? Then I'd get 34-100mm.
Click to expand...

2x converters lose 2 stops of light so your f2.8 becomes f5.6

So you'd be worse off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top