jake_cole

Maybe you can state your question a little clearer. The Field-Of-View for a 50mm lens is the same for all 35mm cameras (as captured on the negative). Are you interested in the field-of-view in the viewfinder relative to a given set of frame lines?

So you would agree than any experiences could reasonably be considered recent.

<p>Try these <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=canon+24-105mm+site%3Aphoto.net">Photo.Net Comments</a>.

See this link on <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/leica.htm">35 mm Rangefinders & Viewfinders</a>

<b>Recent?</b>

I see it like this. For Film your covered with your Canon gear. Sell the Nikon SLR and the 35-70mm F2.8D and the flash. Then Bank the Cash. Keep the 50mm if it will work with the D100. The digital stuff depreciates quickly; but you have a good kit to learn about using a digital SLR, if you use it for another couple of years the D100 may not be worth much, but it has already taken a big hit. The Lens will hold value, although that one is likely not worth as much as the f/2,8 one. At that point when you go looking for a new DSLR you'll have experience with both systems and will have learned a lot. You'll get a lot more for your dollar in the Canon line or the Nikon line and you should be very comfortable with your decision. Good Luck!

Hmmm, my previous post seems to be lost in cyberspace. The major performance issue between the two is that the Canon has IS. The IS can be used to help with indoor shots because it can be used while you pan the lens and help capture other moments in low light. Really if the money is not an issue the Canon is the one to get because IS makes it more versatile and it will hold its resale value way better than the Sigma. You have to decide if IS is and issue for you, and if you got a good price break buying the Sigma that you like.

You have had some bad luck. B&H is OK, no problem there, but often if you ask your local dealer to adjust their price closer to what you can buy it for on-line they will come very close. This can make returns easier, and "some" will reward your loyalty if you become a regular customer. The ElanII I beleive had several people complain about battery issues, I think one of the fixes was to jam some paper in there to keep a tight fit with the battery.

 

It's true if you're saying you can no longer maually focus the lens then it would be the lens, but I don't think your saying that when you say it does not work in 'auto or manual'; I presume your refering to the camera not the lens.

 

Try two things; another lens, and cleaning the electronic contacts on the lens and the camera. You can search for instructions on how to do that, or maybe someone here can describe it. A good pencil eraser is good or proper contact cleaner (not wd40). If a different lens works fine, it could still be contacts.

 

Good Luck!

Great lens optically. It was actually first released in late 1990, Canon says December 1990, so it might just be 15 years old next month. Enjoy !

I think you meant 1DmkII, and this looks like the shutter issue that has shown up on some units. Hopefully someone else will confirm.

It certainly physically will fit. They both use EF mount and the 20D also supports EP-S mount lenses. Some of the older SIgma lenses have electronic interface issues, but buy the 20D and give it a try. You can also contact Sigma, and if there is an electronics issue, they will fix it for free in many cases as long as they still have parts.

I'm not familair with that Tamron lens, and have never used the Canon, but the Canon starts at 17mm; in lens design this is big deal compared to 28mm. It would be much more appropriate to compare the Canon 24-70mm or 28-70mm lenses. You might want to do some other test to see if the Canon has other appealing qualities, but I'm not surprised the resolution is less than that Tamron. Others might have more specific information on the specific lenses in question.

You can use google to find some relative threads. I know there is a review of the Canon here on photo.net with some info in the discussions on the others. This has been discussed a lot because as you can see the differences between the lenses are not that significant (other than the cost of the Canon).

<p>My experience: I had wanted a 180mm macro for ages (before the Tamron existed) and was ready to get the Sigma after seeing several images from the lens. Life got in the way, and the Tamron was released, image tests were great. I have used the Tamron 90mm macro for years and it is awesome, everytime I wanted to replace it with the Canon I looked at the images and could not justify it.

<p>I'm going to get more active in photography again and just last month I purchased the Tamron because I knew I could trust the optics and the electronics. The price of the Canon just seemed to be out of line given these excellent contenders. If the Tamron had not existed I would have got the Sigma, because I could afford to take the hit if there was any problems, a calculated risk. So based on my experience with their 90mm Macro, the various test reports, specs, and a brief handling of the lens, I dropped $650+tax at a local photo store for the lens. The store had all three lens so I even had a last minute look at all the contenders. I don't think you can really go wrong with any of them.

FWIW, my assesment based mostly on the day time pics, but not inconsistent with the night time pics.

 

<p>1st- 35mm ASPH<br>

2nd- 40mm Nokton SC<br>

3rd- 40mm Nokton MC<br>

4th- 40mm Summicron<br>

5th- 35mm<br>

 

<p>Having full frame shots on film in better light would be nice. Looking at a Bessa R3a so thanks for the tests.

The last poster is right; if your looking for something with the same coverage as your 80mm lens on 4x5 then you may want something wider than the 50mm. Since you have a zoom, you can use that to determine the focal length that provides roughly the field of view your interested in.

I would say you have the best candidates listed. Sounds like you might be serious about this so you probably need both a 50mm and a 85mm. Since on the 350D the 85mm will be quite a tight head shot and also great for smaller people. Both lens are quite fast and sharp so they should work well for your application. If the shallow DOF is not quite soft enough, you can easily post process in photoshop.

 

If you wanted a 50mm equivalent field-of-view on your 350D for more casual portraits then you'll need something in the 24mm range. Maybe specify your prefered working distance and any info about the type of framing you typically do. I'm sure others will post some examples.

Check this thread <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EElA">Some wide angles discussed for 1.6x sensors.</a>

 

And several others on the site.

From Google:<br>

<a href="http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=27117">Discussion</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_50500_463/">Sigma Review</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_100400_4556_is/">Canon Review</a>

 

<p>I've never used the Sigma. If I really needed 500mm, and new I would alway have it on a tripod I might consider it. For a more versitle lens, the Canon is a clear winner.

One goes to professionals because they are suppose to know what they are doing. I don't tell my doctor how many stiches are required to secure the incision or what material to use. Get them to admit their mistake and fix it or refund your money. Then never go there again unless you find someone there that knows what they are doing. If they get this wrong, I would not trust them with any other aspect of the process.

Sean, Yes.

<p>The reason it gets complicated, is because some people think in terms of 'field-of-view', but technical aspects of photography and the rendering depend on 'focal-length' or focal-length relative to subject distance. See this link I posted to a separate thread <a href="http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/dof.html">Exploring Depth-Of-Field</a>. So of course when one is choosing their field-of view for a photograph, subject distance depends on what focal lengths they have available.

I have no idea of the specifics of each of the 3 images, more description seems to be in order. The middle one obviously has better contrast which makes it much easy to read and I would say a more faithful reproduction. I cannot see any other differences on with the CRT view.

I agree; The angle of the grid does not seem to represent something that would be a typical hardware failure.

I think this site currently has the <a href="http://www.vanwalree.com/optics/dof.html">definitive exploration of DOF</a> as it relates to focal-length and magnification. Sorry if it has been posted before or maybe even 100 times before, but it is that good.

Although this question was answered several posts earlier, I just wanted to say that the key words are <b><i>equivalent field of view</i></b>. The <i>field of view</i> not the <i>focal-length</i> changes.

A few thoughts.

<ol>

<li>Those Triple Rebates might look good, but it is always a good idea with a new camera system to grow your lens collection slowly.

</li>

<li>Your S400 has the 35mm equivalent focal length range of 36mm-108mm. Are you happy with this range, shorter is OK, longer would be nice?</li>

<li>As you seem to be aware, the 85mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.4 are great lens that are not L. You might even be able to find them used at good savings.</li>

<li>Yes, Dell may be a very good place (with coupons) to buy the type of gear you're looking at.</li>

<li>The Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro is awesome, and the price might be right. The Canon 100mm f/2.8 USM is also awesome optically and I'm sure better ergonomically. USM rules, but when you need Macro Manual focus rules.</li>

<li>If you want a little longer range I would recommend the Tamron 180mm f/3.5 Macro. You'll get extended reach, macro and quality.</li>

<li>You like travel, you don't like tripods, so if you're going to get a zoom think about one with IS when your ready.</li>

</ol>

If you didn't see the PBS NATURE show <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/cuba/">Cuba: Wild Island of the Caribbean</a> then you better catch it on the TV or buy the Video before you go.