which would you choose out of these 3 lens's?

Matt L

Matt L

Messages
852
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Basically just been looking through classifieds and noticed a few lens's for sale and unsure which one i would prefer next, the bad thing is they are all completely different lol.

torn between;

- Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - wanted this lens for god knows how long would get used semi regularly as i imagine i would use it mainly for automotive stuff, landscapes the odd portrait if it didnt look to strange.

- Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM Lens - sounds like a good walk around lens and would be my first L glass, only problem is this is the most expensive lens out of the choice (obviously), but is it really an amazing lens? just looking through flickr at some shots taken with it and none look absolutely amazing, BUT i already have the sigma 17-70 which is doing me great as a walk around lens as i have the wider end only think it doesnt zoom as far... but there arent that many occasioins that i think i have needed to extra zoom so i would only consider it if it was alot sharper than the siggy.

- Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM Lens - Cheapest lens out of the 3, would be mainly used for portraits stuff but obviously not full body as i would have to be miles away :lol: this would probably get used alot less than the other two lens's if im honest, but i do love using the nifty fifty atm so not sure if this lens would really be worth it.

Tbh i can see the outcome all pointing the same way :lol: but just after peoples thoughts on each lens :)

Matt
 
Sorry Matt, but it's a nonsensical question. How on earth can we know what's best for you when you don't even know what you want to shoot with it?
 
My Sigma 12-24 is my most used zoom. Get the wide!! :lol:
 
-Rob- said:
From what you have said about each lens the 10-20mm is clearly the sensible choice. If you were to go for the L glass then you shold sell the Sigma you've already got as you'd never use it again.

Why not buy all 3? :lol:
Click to expand...

:lol: i wish i could afford to :(, if i went for 24-105 then the 17-70 would be sold but then i lose 17-24mm although 10-20 would cure that gap.
 
Having recently acquired a 24-105 myself, I have to say you should go for that. As Rob said, you would then sell the Sigma. The money you get from the sale could help offset the [high] cost of the 24-105 or put towards something else (Speedlite?).

Go on, invest in your first L glass.....you wont regret it!

If you end up not being impressed with it, then you could always sell it on and they hold their value well.
 
Hmm that's an awkward one. When I was a canon guy I had the 24-105 and Loved it. If you're on a crop camera though you're going to need something wide to compliment it. I've never really been a wide angle fan but if that floats your boat. The 85 is really nice at what it does and I love it but it's really a portrait lens. If that's not what you do then it obviously won't work for you.

Alex
 
Have you considered the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM ? I've just purchased one of these used for not a bad price, and like many others have said, is an amazing lens that matches 'L' quality glass optically, and is constant f/2.8 throughout the zoom range. Don't know whether you need this but it definitely comes in handy over a f/4.0, the main difference between the 24-105mm L is the upper zoom range, but you get to keep your wide end to 17mm.
 
I sacrificed my Siggy 17-70 for a 24-105. Really miss it actually. Very sharp, light, didn't need IS.
The lure of L was simply irresistible. Don't get me wrong, I love it!
I've got the Siggy 10-20 as well, gotta say that whilst it is a great lens I hardly ever use it.
I reckon you really need to assess your needs rather than wants in this situation.
God luck with your deliberations !!
 
^^^
What Stewart said.

If your tastes run more towards the wide end then the 10-20 is the obvious choice but if you're after extra length, then the 24-105 takes over. However, should you be aiming for portraits and have the space, the 85mm makes the most sense.

My advice then is to stick the cash somewhere safe until YOU know which to go for.
 
Or...put the cash on a horse and hopefully buy them all.
 
I've just got the 85mm 1.8 this morning and had a few little tests with it. Seems excellent especially when stopped down to 2.8. but if you don't take much portraits then it's not a good choice.

Also have the 10-20 and taken some nice landscapes with it, but haven't had a great deal of use out of it yet.
 
Matt, I miss the Siggy purely because of it's light weight and I prefer the range of 17-70 on the crop body.
Since getting the 24-105 I have also acquired a 5Dmk1 just to put it on!(FAB) but that's another story.
 
Nod said:
^^^
What Stewart said.

If your tastes run more towards the wide end then the 10-20 is the obvious choice but if you're after extra length, then the 24-105 takes over. However, should you be aiming for portraits and have the space, the 85mm makes the most sense.

My advice then is to stick the cash somewhere safe until YOU know which to go for.
Click to expand...

Nice lens. Does the 'wide' stuff fairly well ;)
 
been trying out the 85mm 1.8 today and it's absolutely a joy to use. it's razor sharp, here's a shot I got with it:

4310753207_01fd49836a.jpg
 
Take a look at all your photos and find out whether you are regularly hitting the wide end of the tele end. There is a wonderful free prog somewhere that analyses the exif of your pics and plots the frequency of the focal length you shoot at (someone might be able to help here). If you have a load of 17mm shots chances are you need the wide sigma.

Alternative the 15-85mm looks good, little bit wider and longer than the sigma, quite nice to replace the standard 18-55 range.

EDIT: Found the prog/thread "Exposure plot"

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=183946
 
Cheers for that evo + trevor.

joe lens does look very sharp eyes look awesome in that shot.

at the moment in swaying more towards the 10-20/85mm as i want to do a few more portrait shoots this year but also car shoots so the 10-20 would be more benificial for that i imagine.

hmmm need to properly think about it before i decide.

now to set up another thread for bag advice as mines now too full :(
 
If you're shooting automotive, the 10-20 won't do you much good unless you're composing inside the car or using a rig. It really skews proportions and makes it very hard to flatter your subject. If it helps, since I've been shooting cars more seriously most of my automotive stuff has been done at 50mm or longer.

I've just sold my 24-60mm f/2.8 to switch to primes. Got the 35mm f/2 D and 50mm f/1.4 G (needed for forthcoming people work) but absolutely my next lens will be the 85mm f/1.8 and for car stuff I reckon I'll use it most, followed by the 35mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top