Brendon Cordero
(K=3524) - Comment Date 1/1/2005
|
Howie,
This is tough. You have a fine selection of lenses. I went through a similar dilemma between film lenses and digital lenses.
As you may know. What selection of lenses you want depends what application of photography you are going to do. You mentioned you going to do landscape and wildlife. The lenses you want to sell and replace are wildlife lenses. But, you are not going to to replace them with new ones. So, I am confused.
Fast aperture lenses film lenses (f/2.8 and smaller) doesn't fair too well with digital SLR, unless the rear lens elements are properly muli-coated. I found film lenses work fine using f/8 and smaller. I used flash photography 90% of the time.
Go with your gut feeling, but I find out by keeping the lenses that I have will come in handy one day. Only time I got rid of a lens. When I never used it within two years.
|
|
|
|
Howie Mudge
(K=27933) - Comment Date 1/1/2005
|
Thanks Brenda.
Im selling the 100mm Macro lens because I cant see me doing any macro work. Doesn't interest me and the sigma 135-400 because to be honest, my 80-200 F2.8L and TC is better IMHO.
Im still leaning towards the 20mm sigma prime because I can see other advantages as cathedral low light photography and group shots in low light photography indoors.
Its a tough one. I can justify having two lenses sitting on my shelf I cant ever see me using again.
Thanks for the advice
Howie
|
|
|
|
Stephen Bowden
(K=64141) - Comment Date 1/1/2005
|
Happy New Year Howie, have you thought about the Tamron 28-70mm F2.8 XR DI.
I read the review on this lens from Andy Rouse, who is a pretty good photographer and I always enjoy his reviews.
The review is on the Warehouse Express webpage. I believe it is quite a bit sharper than the Sigma equivalent and seems a good match for your 20D.
I have been doing quite a lot of studying at the moment .. 10D v 20D and which lenses (versus the wifes wrath etc).
I mentioned this lens as I recall you saying you may part with the 17-40 Canon.
Best wishes Howie,
Steve
|
|
|
|
Howie Mudge
(K=27933) - Comment Date 1/1/2005
|
Thanks for the advice Stephen. I actually bought a Tamron 28-75 but the version I bought was useless until F4-F16. Kind of made an F2.8 a useless addition to the lens I bought. I expect a zoom not to be totally sharp wide open but this thing shot like it had a double soft focus filter on front of the lens at F2.8.
I really am quite keen on primes as all three of my primes (100mm Macro is going though) are superb optically and much better even than my L lenses even though they don't have the conveniance of the zoom range.
Also, the 28 on the Tamron for me wouldn't be wide enough for what I want with the zoom but I do appreciate your recommendation.
Im still considering if Im going to keep this 17-40 or not. A very good friend of mine has recommended the Sigma 17-35 F2.8-F4 EX DG lens so I may even take a look at that one. I want two wide angles as I always carry both cameras on me when I go out shooting.
I'll keep you posted on what I decide.
Thanks again for taking the time to give some advice Stephen, much appreciated
Howie
ps Nice bike in your profile pic also :)
|
|
|
|
