j.e.t Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 I am in the market for a wide angle lens, preferably zoom to shoot interiors, landscapes, etc. And just need a wide lens to supplement my existing equipment. I just purchased the Canon 10D, so unfortunately, don't have another $1500 to spend on a Canon lens. I was looking at the Sigma 17-35 Ex 2.8/4 AF, but have been reading mixed reviews about it. Can anyone who owns it or has used it or who knows about it supply any advice? Or advise on other wide lenses that are of high quality but not high price? I need to spend less than $500 for this lens, and I saw some good prices on this lens on ebay. Thank you for your help! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_ Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 If you are shooting for 'fun,' the Sigma lens would probably be OK. But if you shooting for business income, then $500 (for the Sigma lens) plus $1,500 (for the Canon lens,) to get a quality image -- is kind of where you are heading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alaghi Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 I hear tamron 19-35 is a good lens, sigma 15mm EX fisheye too. But canon is the better choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard_oleson Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 Do you need a zoom? Can you get a better quality single-length wide angle for less money? :)= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 I've owned a Sigma 17~35 for about a year and it's a good, middle of the road lens. You can safely ignore the comments of people who may never have used the lens as to its suitability for use in a fee earning environment. I could, if I chose, quite happily sell images taken with this lens.<p> <center> <img border=2 src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1578750&size=md"><p> Sigma 17~35 at about 20mm<p> </center> That said, it's not all perfect. Edge distortion at 17mm is fearsome but that won't worry you on a 10D where the edges will be cut off anyway. Apart from that, it's a decent performer and well worth the money.<p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klix Posted June 27, 2003 Share Posted June 27, 2003 JT - the 10D has an FOV factor of 1.6, so in essence the 17-35mm has an effective focal length of 27-56mm -- still a reasonable WA to normal focal length range, but IMO not wide enough for interiors or landscapes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrei_lau1 Posted June 29, 2003 Share Posted June 29, 2003 Beware of the compatibility issue if you are building up a lens collection and may in future upgrade your camera body. Sigma seems having problem on every generation of new Canon body. Tamron and Tokina seems better in this regard. Of course, Canon lens will be the best choice. You may also consider to look for used lens such as the 17-35L which price is falling due to the new 16-35L and 17-40L. This is still a great lens if not the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochen_S Posted June 30, 2003 Share Posted June 30, 2003 Think about a sigma 14mm. I have one but didn't check the quality properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now