vassil_mihov

Dear Bob,

 

Thanks for sharing your images. Would you elaborate exactly how those photos are helpful to shooting swimmers? Also, what happened to the batter's feet on shot 2?

 

Regards,

 

Vassil

It really depends how much you may need/use extra stops. It becomes a matter of style. I have a 28 1.8 and like that. Occasionally, it is forth the speed over 2.8.

I have both, and each serves a different purpose. If you we to get only one, I'd recommend the wired.

Sometimes I find 28mm not wide enough; however, not often enough to trade it for a 24mm. It depends what one'd use it for. I don't know if 24 has more distortion than the 28. The 28 is not free of distortion. If you put a very tall, very skinny building, like a tower, close to the left or right border of your composition, it may end up looking like the tower of Piza. Apparently, such distortion could be corrected nowadays with various software, but I am not too concerned about it; instead, I am trying to learn how to use such a look to my advantage. I don't have my photos with me right not, but will post samples.

I have the version for Canon and like it a lot. I used it a on film body for 80% of my shots on a recent trip to Europe. It's very sharp, well built. It does suffer from barrel distortion, but I can live with that. The manual focus switch is a bit ackward, I'd have preffered full-time manual as in the 70-200. I find it a little tight 10% of the time, so you may consider the 24mm instead.

Jeff,

 

My post was not addressed to you, it was written independently of yours (and before yours appeared). It is a fact that some 10Ds have this problem.

 

Regards,

 

Vassil

Birthday (digital photo, sorry).<div></div>

Although this is a known problem (just run a search on the back-focus topic), you'll NEVER get anyone on this site to agree or even allow the possibility. Canon blasphemy! Expect to labeled a troll. Maybe people here would rather testify in evidence of the gifts from above that Canon delivers.

Probably take the 28-70. I just travelled in Europe, took only 28 and 50 mm primes, used 90% of the time the 28mm.

Guys,

 

Thank you very much for the suggestions. I am sure they will result in better photos. I am really impressed that you've taken the time to provide so detailed comments -- thanks again!

f2.8 1/125 @ 200mm handheld (so probably one should factor in camera shake), no flash. Not "weak" for my taste, see the individual hairs standing out. I have shot beautiful portraits with that lens, almost rivaling the sharpness of my Canon 100 2.8.<div></div>

I have shot sports before, primarily hockey and basketball, with good

results. I am new to shooting swimming, and found it more challenging

than I expected.

 

Please take a look at the attached photo and the ones in

my "Swimming" folder for critique and suggestions.

 

Technical details: Digital Rebel, Lexar card, Sigma 70-200 lens.<div></div>

Thanks everyone for your suggestions.

 

Jon, I just happen to prefer the focal lenghts (in digital with 1.6 crop factor) of the 28mm (effective around 44mm) and the 70-200; they just happen to be Sigmas. They could have been Canons if I could justify spending the money for the Canon 2.8 70-200, or if Canon made a good 28 1.8 (they have a good 28 2.8).

 

Basically, the 50 (effective 80mm) is a little odd on digital; long for normal, and relatively short for portraits. I'll keep it as my normal lens on the film body, as this is the true focal lenght view that I like.

 

I've found the 100 to be the sharpest of the bunch, but have not found its best use yet (as I have not done much macro). If it were vastly superior to the 70-200, I'd use it more for portraits, but the 70-200 is very good, optically on par with Canon's version.

 

I'll give it a chance and use it for a specific project or two. Also, I bought it used for a good price, so I don't think I'll have a problem getting my money back, and neither think that it ties up a ton of money in unused equipment.

 

Thanks again for everybody's suggestions. If anyone has done a recent macro project, I'll appreciate a few ideas.

Unless they are photographing a fish wedding?<div></div>

Hi everybody,

 

I have the following set up: Digital Rebel with kit lens, Sigma 28

1.8, Canon 50 1.8 mkI, Canon 100 2.8 macro, Sigma 70-200 2.8, 2x

teleconverter, Bigen tripod, wired remote, etc...

 

Canon 100 2.8 may be the sharpest lens among those, but I rarely use

it. The sigma 70-200 is excellent and more versatile (and the same

aperture), so it gets almost all the action in this range, including

portraits (if you are not familiar with it first-hand, please spare

the anti-sigma spam).

 

So, should I keep the 100mm? Or, what should I do to start using it

more? Any inspirational ideas? Obviously, I don't use it that much

for its main (macro) purpose.

 

P.S. I kind of feel the same way about the 50mm. Probably the main

reason I will keep it is that I got a second, film, body; otherwise,

the 28 1.8, another excellent non-Canon lens, is perfect on the

digital body, and gets a lot more use than the 50mm.

Michael,

 

I suggest Sigma 20, 24, or 28mm, all f1.8. Contrary to what Brent says, the Canon equvalents (where available) will not outperform these lenses.

Dear Damian,

 

You must be a (closet) Maiden fan? :-)

 

Regards,

 

Vassil

Johannes,

 

I see your point. Still, Iowa or Manhattan?

 

Vassil

Thanks, everyone. Bas, for years I used only a 50mm, but I find it a little tight on occasion. Steve, 28 is generally wide enough for me, I was never too much into landscapes or buildings as opposed to shooting (I mean, photographing) people; 24 could be an improvement, though. I appreciate your suggestions.

I have the kit lens, the 50mm, and Sigma 28 1.8 (on a D Rebel). I would have preferred slightly the 24mm to the 28; however, they are from the same familly and optically equally good. I use it quite a bit, although not necessarily for street photography. Among these three, I probably use the 28mm the most, and the 50mm the least. If your "street" photography presents you with unique indoors shots, it is really worth it.

Hi everyone. Others have asked this, but since there is no

unique "right" answer, I'd like to benefit from you exerience on the

following. I will be traveling in Europe this summer with a EOS

film body. I'd like to travel as light as possible. If you were to

take no more than two lenses, which ones would you take? I have

Sigma 28 1.8, Canon 50 1.8, Sigma 70-200 2.8 (this one stays home),

Canon 100 2.8 macro. I am leaning towards going only with the 28

1.8, and maybe the 50mm. Should I consider buying a relatively

cheap 28-105 or 24-85 zoom? I have no specific photographic

objective in mind, probably will be shooting mostly buildings,

streets and people, regular tourist fare. Thanks in advance!

Thanks again to everyone. I just picked up an original Elan from ebay, it was a toss up between it and an Elan IIe, I just happened to "win" the original one.

Hi Suman,

 

To prevent some other "son of a bitch" or "dumbass" (who may be interested in your lens) from complaining, can you post the serial numbers of each lens and indicate which is the good one, i.e., the mold-free, 9+ one?

I use Sigma 28 1.8 and am perfectly happy.

I have the 28 1.8 and works great (as a normal lens) on a Digital Rebel.