what choice is there for 24/28 to 70/100mm zooms ?

S

stevewestern

Messages
5,109
Edit My Images
Yes
Right, I am still needing help - I am thinking of getting either a 24-70/f2.8 or S/H 28-70/f2.8 Canon lenses, but have just had recommended to me the Tamron 28-75/f2.8, plus there is a Sigma version I believe. The Tamron has a 67mm filter so is clearly less obtrusive, is lighter and smaller, all good things too !
Now, the important thing is f2.8, and ideally I would like a 20-100mm focal range, but I won't be able to find that. So, what can you suggest to go on a Canon 5D that might be cheaper and maybe even smaller than either of the Canon offerings ?
 
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 ?
Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 ?
 
I'm choosing a lens or two right now and am spending most of my time on THIS site. They seem to have reviewed a LOT of lenses. And they list them in focal range order. Very handy.
 
StewartR - as someone who has access to and uses a fair few, which would you buy or use for your photography ?
Are the Sigmas big and heavy like the Canons ? Do they focus quickly ?
I did have the 24-105 Canon but it is only f4 and I found it slightly slow to focus - can you say how the Sigmas compare to this ?
Thanks for any help !

Albedo - I am heading over to your link now, but my internet access is really bad at present, so may not even be able to get there....
 
Sorry Steve, I can't help you as far as the performance of the lenses is concerned. At www.LensesForHire.co.uk we don't stock either of those Sigma zooms. The way we see it, if you can hire a Canon 24-70 for only £37 per week, or £58 for a fortnight, there's not going to be much demand for the cheaper Sigma equivalents. And whilst one might be prepared to spend a few pounds hiring one of the expensive Canon "L"s before committing to a purchase, one probably wouldn't if the lens only costs £200 in the first place.

The Canon 24-70 does focus very quickly. Personally I'd be surprised if the Sigmas could match it in that department, but I'd be interested to hear from someone who has tried them both/all.

But I can help you with the specs...

Canon 24-70: length 124mm, diameter 83mm, filter 77mm, weight 950g
Sigma 24-70: length 116mm, diameter 89mm, filter 82mm, weight 715g
Sigma 28-70: length 87mm, diameter 74mm, filter 67mm, weight 510g

The two 24-70s are fairly similar, and the 28-70 is much smaller. Maybe it's the extra 4mm at the wide end that makes the difference.
 
Stewart - many thanks for your help and time !
Anyone else go anything to add..?

As for 4mm extra at the wide end - I often wish..................No, nothing
 
I use my Nikkor 28-105 a lot as it's a great walkabout portrait zoom. It's not f:2.8, it's f:3.5-4.5, but then a 2.8 would be a whole load bigger. It's sadly discontinued now, primarly because of the drop in SLR sales meant that the 18-70 zoom range for DSLRs replaced it in the range. I would rpesume that the same thing happened to Canon and that there's an older Canon lens of the same ilk which you could look at getting 2nd hand?
 
NorthernNikon - thanks for the thought, but having had the 24-105 f4 IS Canon, which is roughly the same sort of thing as the Nikkor 28-105, and sold it as I do want f2.8 (partly to aid focusing speed, partly to give me a brighter viewfinder and partly for the out of focus backgrounds) I am looking at having to settle on a 24-70 or 28-70, as I can't find anything that has the length of the 24-105 with an f2.8 aperture..
 
I have the 24-70 2.8 Sigma.

Never touched the Canon as I simply can't afford it.

Comments as follows.

Its a big beasty and heavy..focusing speed i'm happy with and I'd say its fairly quick although not as quick as my 100-400L...

I'm really really pleased with the lens and think I will get some great shots from it...

My advice though if you can afford L go L
 
steveinspain said:
Right, I am still needing help - I am thinking of getting either a 24-70/f2.8 or S/H 28-70/f2.8 Canon lenses, but have just had recommended to me the Tamron 28-75/f2.8, plus there is a Sigma version I believe. The Tamron has a 67mm filter so is clearly less obtrusive, is lighter and smaller, all good things too !
Now, the important thing is f2.8, and ideally I would like a 20-100mm focal range, but I won't be able to find that. So, what can you suggest to go on a Canon 5D that might be cheaper and maybe even smaller than either of the Canon offerings ?
Click to expand...
Canon do a 55 - 200 lens which is tiny. Not f2.8 though. I'm not sure I've seen a small sized f2.8 lens.

Also..

I think you should consider that a Canon lens will be noticably faster on the old auto focus that any of the compatible lenses. So you need to consider the importance of speed in your decision.
 
I moved from a Sigma 24-70 to Canon and I reckon optically they were much the same. But, the Sigma was much slower to focus. Depends what you want it for whether that is an issue or not. Now have the 24-105 as the reach and IS appealled.

Paul
 
I have the 28-70 sigma not had a chance to use it much yet due to the quality weather. Pretty quiet and solid not to heavy and fairly good range (have 10-20 for wides). Image quality seems good so far, best of all though was under £200 brand new.
 
Sigma 24-60 yes 60, 2.8 all the way, filter size 77mm I have mine for 2 months been really pleased with it. Warehouse Express £199 Its lighter than the 24-70. A very unsung lens in my opinion :)
 
grumpybadger said:
I moved from a Sigma 24-70 to Canon and I reckon optically they were much the same. But, the Sigma was much slower to focus. Depends what you want it for whether that is an issue or not. Now have the 24-105 as the reach and IS appealled.

Paul
Click to expand...

Paul - do you find that the 24-105 is fast enough to focus, especially compared to the Sigma 24-70 ?
If so, then I guess I need the Canon 24-70, as I found the 24-105 Canon too slow for my use (kids in fairly low light).
Certainly, the length and IS are very appealing, and I am not adverse to pushing up the ISO, but slow focus is a no-no for me..!
 
I'm playing around with some of the same ideas at the moment myself Steve, although I had pretty much settled on the canon 24-105 until reading this thread, so now I'm not too sure, look forward to seeing what you go for :)
 
steveinspain said:
Paul - do you find that the 24-105 is fast enough to focus, especially compared to the Sigma 24-70 ?
If so, then I guess I need the Canon 24-70, as I found the 24-105 Canon too slow for my use (kids in fairly low light).
Certainly, the length and IS are very appealing, and I am not adverse to pushing up the ISO, but slow focus is a no-no for me..!
Click to expand...

Steve

The 24-105 is quicker than the Sigma 24-70 on focus.

Paul
 
Cheers Paul - seems I am being guided towards the Canon 24-70 or 28-70.
I fear that the 24 will win, as I do want something wide, and when my 30d and 10-22 has gone, I will miss it, even if I rarely used it at anything wider than about 15mm (crop body, so roughly 23mm on the 5d)
Speed of focus is a major issue, so from what you are saying, the Sigmas are out of the shortlist..

Sepulchre - looking at Kerso's prices, there is little in it between the Canon 24-105 and the 24-70, if that helps you....
 
Ihave a canon 5d with a 24-70 2.8 and am well pleased with it, its not a cheap combination of course but I think you get what you pay for! I cant think of anything worse than buying a cheaper lens or one that you are not sure about then wishing you hadnt. If in doubt hire one to make sure.
 
Steve what are you going to be using the lens for that you need a fast af system
 
billyd - you have caught me there.
I know I would be unhappy with anything other than what I know to be among the best - that feeling of 'if only I had bought that one' and I think I am sort of looking for something cheap but knowing that it won't make me happy (I am not saying my photography is good enough to warrant the best gear, but hey...!)
A friend let me have a play with his Canon 24-70, and I may have the 28-70 to play with soon, but really, I ought to be asking Canon why they don't make a 24-105 f2.8 !

macky - as Stewart points out - kids in low light, and close in, so a small head movement makes for a totally out of focus picture, and what kids do you know that sit still for any time at all...?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top