Lens advice

John Wiley · June 11th, 2011, 06:10 PM

What do you mean by the Tamron's having focusing issues? Any of these lenses are going to be slow and awkward to auto-focus with for video - even Canon L-series lenses. Because in video mode they use the much slower contrast-detect AF rather than the phase-detect AF system they use for stills, all of them will perform pretty poorly in video mode. It is far better to learn how to manual focus properly.

The Sigma 17-70 is not a constant aperture zoom (it goes from f/2.8 at wide to f/4 when you zoom) which explains the cheaper price.

Nigel Barker · June 12th, 2011, 01:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wiley

Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Do it.

I just got one of these as a general purpose lens on my new Canon 600D. It's my first EF-S lens as until now I have been using 5DIIs with EF lenses. It's a quarter of the price of the Canon 17-55mm F/2.8 but seems quite decent. There are evidently two versions one with & the without image stabilisation (or Vibration Compensation as Tamron call it). I got the version with IS (or VC) as it was only about 10% more expensive but it is really noisy compared to any of my Canon lenses with IS.

John Wiley · June 12th, 2011, 08:14 PM

Though I've only used the non-VC version, from all reports I've read the newer VC version is not as good optically. It's a shame - the optical quality of the non-VC version is equal to the Canon version, but unfortunately only the Canon one seems to put IS and IQ into the same package - albeit at a much higher price.

Stelios Christofides · June 13th, 2011, 08:51 AM

I just bought the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 and i am really happy with my 60d

stelios

Robert James · June 13th, 2011, 08:57 AM

John: I was reading reviews over at B&H saying that the 70-200 2.8 has some slow focus problems which make the lens a touch problematic.

Though I know IS or VC or whatever they call them (:p) isn't needed for video I DO plan on taking photos as well with the camera so want a lens that can function as both.

__________________

Hmmm, more to think about. I would want some form of IS on the lens that is competent. How much is sacrificed, I wonder, in that Tameron because I was leaning towards that because the Sigma changes ranges.

John Wiley · June 13th, 2011, 06:40 PM

What sort of photos do you plan on taking? For anything other than really fast sports, the AF is fine. Portraits, weddings, even unpredictable children are pretty easy to shoot without any interference from the AF system. I've certainly never had any issues with the AF for stills, not even for surfing photos.

And for video, as I said before, it's a non-issue.

Robert James · June 13th, 2011, 09:24 PM

John: I'll be doing concerts. I took out the 55-250 this week and it was not so great though I did snag a few usable images.

The 50mm 1.8 did nicely though gave me pause on if I SHOULD pick up the 1.4.

I mean, hey, in an ideal world where money wasn't a factor I'd snag the Canon 70-200, 17-55 and 50 1.4 but that would be about $6000 :p

Stephen Hill · June 14th, 2011, 07:05 AM

Personally I regretted buying the 50mm 1.8. I wish I'd just hung on and saved the cash for the 1.4 instead. Much nice focus ring and the wider apperture is really useful for events where you have no control over the light.

Nigel Barker · June 14th, 2011, 07:17 AM

Just to report that I returned the Tamron SP AF 17-50 mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Lens & paid the extra to buy the Canon 17-55mm F/2.8 USM IS instead. The Tamron was unsuitable for video for many reasons. You need to turn the focus & zoom rings like a Nikon i.e. the wrong way round for a Canon. The image stabilisation was really noisy & the AF wasn't very fast. You get what you pay for & the Canon lens of course focuses the correct way but also the IS is quiet & AF is very fast.

Robert James · June 14th, 2011, 02:13 PM

I haven't really regreated the $112 I paid for the 1.8, to be honest. It's been the lens I've gone to the most and has held up very well in night-time shooting (see my SHOW YOUR WORK thread in that forum for examples). True, the focus ring bring right on the edge is a pain in the ass.

Again, how much of a dif is it to merit the extra $450?

* * *

As for the Tameron VC, I have opted against that one due to what others have posted and reviews I have read stating it worse then the none VC.

The none VC, though, is said to hold it's own against the much pricier Canon. Grrr...the choices..

Ben Giles · June 15th, 2011, 11:23 AM

My 2p worth:

I've gone for the following with my 60D and getting really good results with them:

Tokina 11-16 2.8
Canon 17-55 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8 (just as nice as the Canon when I did tests against a friend's Canon 70-200 2.8 - even with stills)

I'm looking forward to something along the lines of the 24-105, but faster than f4. I think that length range hits the sweet-spot for most of my filming needs - often I find the 17-55 not long enough and the 70-200 not wide enough, so end up changing lenses more than I'd like.

Ben.

Nigel Barker · June 16th, 2011, 02:54 AM

The 3X crop feature on the 600D gives you the extra reach of the 70-200mm lens (longer in fact at 260mm) without changing lenses.

Robert James · June 17th, 2011, 10:22 AM

So, as a bit of an update:
I just snagged the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS.

The Canon just seemed overpriced and after agonizing over comparrisons and reviews there didn't seem to be a heap of difference. Sigma came with case, hood and a whopping 10-YEAR warranty!

Haven't really tested it out much yet. Will see if the weather clears today.

First thought: I kept seeing that the AF was "silent". I find it to be quite loud, actually.

Steve Bleasdale · June 17th, 2011, 12:43 PM

Not had a problem with mine Nigel? What do ya mean the focus is the wrong way around? On my 60d don't know what you mean?

Tom Hardwick · June 17th, 2011, 12:54 PM

I'll tack my question on here because there's a lot of lens knowledge in all your heads. I'm talking stills now and I'm looking for a constant f/2.8 aperture..

The 80 - 200mm f/2.8 is a great portrait lens on a full-frame SLR, but what is there out there for my diddly-chipped Canon 60D? Is there an equivalent lens in the Canon / Tamron / Sigma / Tokina stable?

I've just been informed by Sigma UK that the Japanese tsunami has disrupted all supplies of the new IS 50 - 150 f/2.8 and they've no idea when they'll see their first one.

The other interesting lens looks to be the Tokina 50 - 135 ATX f/2.8 but that too seems to be almost non existent. Maybe the Tsunami again?

Maybe there are others?

tom.

June 11th, 2011, 06:10 PM	#16
John Wiley Trustee Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Byron Bay, Australia Posts: 1,155	Re: Lens advice What do you mean by the Tamron's having focusing issues? Any of these lenses are going to be slow and awkward to auto-focus with for video - even Canon L-series lenses. Because in video mode they use the much slower contrast-detect AF rather than the phase-detect AF system they use for stills, all of them will perform pretty poorly in video mode. It is far better to learn how to manual focus properly. The Sigma 17-70 is not a constant aperture zoom (it goes from f/2.8 at wide to f/4 when you zoom) which explains the cheaper price.

June 12th, 2011, 08:14 PM	#18
John Wiley Trustee Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Byron Bay, Australia Posts: 1,155	Re: Lens advice Though I've only used the non-VC version, from all reports I've read the newer VC version is not as good optically. It's a shame - the optical quality of the non-VC version is equal to the Canon version, but unfortunately only the Canon one seems to put IS and IQ into the same package - albeit at a much higher price.

June 13th, 2011, 08:51 AM	#19
Stelios Christofides Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Nicosia, CYPRUS Posts: 1,080	Re: Lens advice I just bought the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 and i am really happy with my 60d stelios __________________ My Blog: http://steliosc.blogspot.com "I hope for nothing, I fear nothing, I am free" Nikos Kazantzakis

June 13th, 2011, 08:57 AM	#20
Robert James Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 137	Re: Lens advice John: I was reading reviews over at B&H saying that the 70-200 2.8 has some slow focus problems which make the lens a touch problematic. Though I know IS or VC or whatever they call them (:p) isn't needed for video I DO plan on taking photos as well with the camera so want a lens that can function as both. __________________ Hmmm, more to think about. I would want some form of IS on the lens that is competent. How much is sacrificed, I wonder, in that Tameron because I was leaning towards that because the Sigma changes ranges.

June 13th, 2011, 06:40 PM	#21
John Wiley Trustee Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Byron Bay, Australia Posts: 1,155	Re: Lens advice What sort of photos do you plan on taking? For anything other than really fast sports, the AF is fine. Portraits, weddings, even unpredictable children are pretty easy to shoot without any interference from the AF system. I've certainly never had any issues with the AF for stills, not even for surfing photos. And for video, as I said before, it's a non-issue.

June 13th, 2011, 09:24 PM	#22
Robert James Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 137	Re: Lens advice John: I'll be doing concerts. I took out the 55-250 this week and it was not so great though I did snag a few usable images. The 50mm 1.8 did nicely though gave me pause on if I SHOULD pick up the 1.4. I mean, hey, in an ideal world where money wasn't a factor I'd snag the Canon 70-200, 17-55 and 50 1.4 but that would be about $6000 :p

June 14th, 2011, 07:05 AM	#23
Stephen Hill Regular Crew Join Date: May 2011 Location: London Posts: 38	Re: Lens advice Personally I regretted buying the 50mm 1.8. I wish I'd just hung on and saved the cash for the 1.4 instead. Much nice focus ring and the wider apperture is really useful for events where you have no control over the light.

June 14th, 2011, 07:17 AM	#24
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	Re: Lens advice Just to report that I returned the Tamron SP AF 17-50 mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Lens & paid the extra to buy the Canon 17-55mm F/2.8 USM IS instead. The Tamron was unsuitable for video for many reasons. You need to turn the focus & zoom rings like a Nikon i.e. the wrong way round for a Canon. The image stabilisation was really noisy & the AF wasn't very fast. You get what you pay for & the Canon lens of course focuses the correct way but also the IS is quiet & AF is very fast.

June 14th, 2011, 02:13 PM	#25
Robert James Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 137	Re: Lens advice I haven't really regreated the $112 I paid for the 1.8, to be honest. It's been the lens I've gone to the most and has held up very well in night-time shooting (see my SHOW YOUR WORK thread in that forum for examples). True, the focus ring bring right on the edge is a pain in the ass. Again, how much of a dif is it to merit the extra $450? * * * As for the Tameron VC, I have opted against that one due to what others have posted and reviews I have read stating it worse then the none VC. The none VC, though, is said to hold it's own against the much pricier Canon. Grrr...the choices..

June 15th, 2011, 11:23 AM	#26
Ben Giles Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: UK Posts: 145	Re: Lens advice My 2p worth: I've gone for the following with my 60D and getting really good results with them: Tokina 11-16 2.8 Canon 17-55 2.8 Sigma 70-200 2.8 (just as nice as the Canon when I did tests against a friend's Canon 70-200 2.8 - even with stills) I'm looking forward to something along the lines of the 24-105, but faster than f4. I think that length range hits the sweet-spot for most of my filming needs - often I find the 17-55 not long enough and the 70-200 not wide enough, so end up changing lenses more than I'd like. Ben. __________________ www.bengiles.co.uk www.matobo.co.uk

June 16th, 2011, 02:54 AM	#27
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	Re: Lens advice The 3X crop feature on the 600D gives you the extra reach of the 70-200mm lens (longer in fact at 260mm) without changing lenses.

June 17th, 2011, 10:22 AM	#28
Robert James Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Canada Posts: 137	Re: Lens advice So, as a bit of an update: I just snagged the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS. The Canon just seemed overpriced and after agonizing over comparrisons and reviews there didn't seem to be a heap of difference. Sigma came with case, hood and a whopping 10-YEAR warranty! Haven't really tested it out much yet. Will see if the weather clears today. First thought: I kept seeing that the AF was "silent". I find it to be quite loud, actually. Last edited by Robert James; June 17th, 2011 at 10:56 AM.

June 17th, 2011, 12:43 PM	#29
Steve Bleasdale Trustee Join Date: May 2010 Location: England liverpool Posts: 1,343	Re: Lens advice Not had a problem with mine Nigel? What do ya mean the focus is the wrong way around? On my 60d don't know what you mean?

June 17th, 2011, 12:54 PM	#30
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Re: Lens advice I'll tack my question on here because there's a lot of lens knowledge in all your heads. I'm talking stills now and I'm looking for a constant f/2.8 aperture.. The 80 - 200mm f/2.8 is a great portrait lens on a full-frame SLR, but what is there out there for my diddly-chipped Canon 60D? Is there an equivalent lens in the Canon / Tamron / Sigma / Tokina stable? I've just been informed by Sigma UK that the Japanese tsunami has disrupted all supplies of the new IS 50 - 150 f/2.8 and they've no idea when they'll see their first one. The other interesting lens looks to be the Tokina 50 - 135 ATX f/2.8 but that too seems to be almost non existent. Maybe the Tsunami again? Maybe there are others? tom.