ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 23,565
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
What does that even mean?
If he's like me, the images are sharp but uninteresting. Great for detailed landscape, social gatherings, record shots.
What does that even mean?
I thought the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Art DG DN was supposed to be a very good lens?
Bobbin i see you have the 28-200 do u like it, i did watch a few vids on it today a few downsides, but some nice upsides too... i suppose i should ask if u didnt have that what else did you considerIts a thing a lens can be perfect but rubbish because it has no "character".
And character usually means flaws.
Your 35mm would be nice, if only xmas wasnt so close... Its on my list... Do you do Inteest free ?Aye, it was a cheap ploy because I had previously mentioned that my 24-105 will be going up for sale soon.
PS. All the other lenses mentioned are also junk..
Your 35mm would be nice, if only xmas wasnt so close... Its on my list... Do you do Inteest free ?
Its fine if you like the range. I have discovered I don't, 28mm just isn't wide enough.Bobbin i see you have the 28-200 do u like it, i did watch a few vids on it today a few downsides, but some nice upsides too... i suppose i should ask if u didnt have that what else did you consider
I have the 28-200 practically bolted permanently to my a7c.Bobbin i see you have the 28-200 do u like it, i did watch a few vids on it today a few downsides, but some nice upsides too... i suppose i should ask if u didnt have that what else did you consider
Crystal ball readings for the future are pretty easy as far as photographers are concerned!Then you'll hanker f/2
Then f/1.8
Then f/1.4
And then you'll buy the 50GM
Crystal ball readings for the future are pretty easy as far as photographers are concerned!
I bought the 55mm f1.8 a while ago, as much as I enjoy it, I do now understand people’s comments about it being a bit ‘clinical’. Maybe a sigma 1.4 is what I need, keep the 24-105 for its versatility?
Its fine if you like the range. I have discovered I don't, 28mm just isn't wide enough.
If I was doing it again I'd get the 24-105.
I'm going to keep the 28-200 as my telephoto lens. But it doesn't get used much.
I want to add the Tamron 20-40 as my all purpose lens, then I'd still like the 35GM for night time stuff.
Probably sell my 20mmG lens, and sell our give away the 50f1.8.
Crystal ball readings for the future are pretty easy as far as photographers are concerned!
I bought the 55mm f1.8 a while ago, as much as I enjoy it, I do now understand people’s comments about it being a bit ‘clinical’. Maybe a sigma 1.4 is what I need, keep the 24-105 for its versatility?
I feel exactly the same I regret getting rid of my 24-70f4.I’m on the fence with the 24-105mm, optically it’s very good, AF wise it’s very good, I just think it’s a bit too big and heavy for a travel lens. I actually preferred the 24-70mm f4 and sometimes regret getting rid of it. No doubt the 24-105mm is optically better but it’s not exactly night and day.
Well the 24-105 doesn’t suck dust like Henry the hoover unlike the Sigma and no they haven’t fixed that issue. I love Sigma lenses in general but that’s a real issue that can’t be ignored.Between Sigma 24-70 DN and Sony 24-105 I would clearly pick sigma https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1175&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0
And perhaps some f1.4 ART primes. I don't see any stellar qualities about 24-105, but perhaps it is a little better than canon ones.
The downside of the sigma for me is weight. Obviously you expect weight with f2.8 but I’ve never gelled with 24-70mm f2.8’s. At the focal length f2.8 isn’t giving great subject isolation or bokeh, and stopped down the sharpness difference isn’t enough to justify the extra weight for me.Between Sigma 24-70 DN and Sony 24-105 I would clearly pick sigma https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1175&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0
And perhaps some f1.4 ART primes. I don't see any stellar qualities about 24-105, but perhaps it is a little better than canon ones.
I assume this is just zooms as I’ve never had dust issue with Sigma primes?Well the 24-105 doesn’t suck dust like Henry the hoover unlike the Sigma and no they haven’t fixed that issue. I love Sigma lenses in general but that’s a real issue that can’t be ignored.
I went for the Tamron 28-75 G2 and many have said it’s as sharp if not sharper than the 24-70 GM II. I added the new 20mm Sigma 1.4 DG DN for wider stuff as I’m finding the extra 5mm at the long end has removed the need for an 85mm.I've just traded in my 24-105...for the second time. It should be perfect for me on paper, but I just don't click with it. I currently have my finger hovering over the buy button for a 24-70 GM II from Panamoz but cor blummy it's still pricey, and will leave me hankering for something longer to complement it.
Yeah that zoom in particular but plenty of reports on the 100-400 also sucking in dust quite easily but that can be forgiven because it’s not built to the same standard and priced accordingly.I assume this is just zooms as I’ve never had dust issue with Sigma primes?
The Tamron is remarkably light. I expected I’d hate it and return it but it’s fantastic.The downside of the sigma for me is weight. Obviously you expect weight with f2.8 but I’ve never gelled with 24-70mm f2.8’s. At the focal length f2.8 isn’t giving great subject isolation or bokeh, and stopped down the sharpness difference isn’t enough to justify the extra weight for me.
28mm’s not wide enough for me unfortunately.The Tamron is remarkably light. I expected I’d hate it and return it but it’s fantastic.
I don't really understand the criticism of the 55mm f1.8 being clinical. It's pretty sharp across the frame from wide open, the bokeh is ok and indeed gets praise from some reviewers
See, I didn't really get on with the FE55 either. I think it was more the focal length rather than actual files because it was certainly sharp enough with decent AF from what I remember.
You mean Sony?...
Yeah that's one thing, the bokeh is just 'ok'. Can't complain at all about the sharpness and AF, it is plenty quick and quiet!
In no position to buy right now sadly However I am gonna treat myself and hire the 35GM over Christmas I think, for use while I'm around family etc.
Surely it's the photographer that creates the emotional images?The 24-105 is almost perfect for travel - if it would go to 120 then it would be even better. Again it's not a lens that creates emotional images, but it's a good tool for general use.
If the images are uninteresting, then how's that a fault of the lens?If he's like me, the images are sharp but uninteresting. Great for detailed landscape, social gatherings, record shots.
Surely it's the photographer that creates the emotional images?
If the images are uninteresting, then how's that a fault of the lens?
Yeah that's one thing, the bokeh is just 'ok'. Can't complain at all about the sharpness and AF, it is plenty quick and quiet!
Never thought of renting lenses, where do you rent them from?Yeah that's one thing, the bokeh is just 'ok'. Can't complain at all about the sharpness and AF, it is plenty quick and quiet!
In no position to buy right now sadly However I am gonna treat myself and hire the 35GM over Christmas I think, for use while I'm around family etc.
There’s a member on here that owns a company, lensesforhire I think it is, then there’s hireacamera and lenspimp. Depending on which lens and how long you hire it can be cheaper to buy and then sell a used one.Never thought of renting lenses, where do you rent them from?
WEX also have a lens hire departmentThere’s a member on here that owns a company, lensesforhire I think it is, then there’s hireacamera and lenspimp. Depending on which lens and how long you hire it can be cheaper to buy and then sell a used one.
As do https://www.hireacamera.com/WEX also have a lens hire department
I did mention themAs do https://www.hireacamera.com/
If you play clever with Bank Holidays/Weekends, you can get lenses for reasonable periods for little outlay (ie over Christmas/New Year)