Lenses for canon 30d (canon vs. sigma and types)

[rafael_azofeifa]

Hello,

I'm about to buy a Canon 30D and I'm looking for lenses. I'd like to shoot

mostly people. Indoors and outdoors. Portraits and full body. I've seen that L

Canon lenses are rated as extremely good but very expensive, but I also see that

Sigma has lower cost lenses and are very good too.

 

Some of the questions I have (I'm not asking for answers to all of them but I

ask them so you can know how much I know and where do I stand, as an example):

- Do I need to go for a f1.2 or f1.8 in order to have better blured backgrounds,

or do I need a telephoto?

- Has anyone taken pictures from both Canon and Sigma, see the results and say

"I see the difference in quality"?

- Which would be a good place to start for less than $1000 or even lower?

- I'm no pro but I wouldn't like to buy lenses that will make me later think

"why didn't I ask for quality instead of this cheap thing"?

- Is Sigma that bad compared to the L line of Canon?

- Would it be better to save a bit more and buy 3 different lenses for different

things?

- Does Image Stabilization really makes a difference?

- Should I be worried of buying lenses for just the 30D so after I change the

body I'd have to get rid of them?

- etc.

 

I tried to make a lot of questions just as a guide (I didn't do it in a forum

and I got a lot of "that depends" and "but why do you.." so I better limit my

position well using questions so you see what I don't know).

 

The main question would be: If you had to choose a lens (or more) for pictures

of people (indoors, out, faces, bodies) in a not very expensive lens and high

quality pictures, what would it (or they) be and why?

 

Thank you very much.

Rafael.

[philg]

http://www.photo.net/equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/ talks about this to some extent. A Sigma 30/1.4 would be a good start. You could add a Canon 85/1.8 for portraits. Together these would cost less than $1000 and cover 95% of portrait challenges. You don't need a a Canon L lens to get high quality; a prime (non-zoom) lens from either Canon or Sigma should be quite good.

[tommyinca]

KEH currently has a 50/1.8 MK1 (the more solidly built version then the MK2) for $99. If you act fast, it could be yours. There are not too many lens that could beat this one at this price or much higher price.

[geoff_foale]

Hello Rafael. Avoid over cheap lenses. This year I bought a second hand 10D with a Sigma 28-300 lens, cheap and covers all ranges. But I've saved up my pennies and switched to a Canon 70-300 IS (hard to get hold of in the UK - I've waited 2 months). Having tried it for 2 days I've ordered the 28-135 IS to cover the rest of the range. Even when hand held it's far sharper than the Sigma on a tripod! But it is a lot bigger and heavier to carry around.

 

Would IS be a better option than a cheaper fast lens in your situation? There are arguments for and against. As I mostly photograph landscapes and wildlife my requirements are a bit different from yours, so I suggest that you also look at 'Is IS really worth it' about 6 items ahead of this where there is a lot of information.

 

Hope I've helped a little. Geoff.