File :-(, x, )
Zooms vs. Primes Anonymous
I currently have a Tokina 19-35, Canon 35/2, 100/2.8 that I use regularly on both a crop and film camera.

I am very interested in buying either a 50/1.4 and Sigma 17-70, or buying a Sigma 24-70/2.8 whose reviews are rife with quality control issues. It is well know to be soft in the 50-70 range @ 2.8

I shoot mostly try street, and normal panoramas (no extreme wides), but currently, I spend too much time changing lenses, and sometimes miss some good shots.

I enjoy gear threads as much as anybody else, but I would like to know what the general consensus is on this topic.

Here are some sample of what I do in order to prevent gear rage.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Focal Length (35mm Equiv)171 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:19 00:14:56F-Numberf/8.0Lens Aperturef/8.0Focal Length171.47 mm
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Impromptu hand held.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwarePicasa 3.0PhotographerPicasa 2.7Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:07 05:44:11Exposure Time1/80 secF-Numberf/8.0Lens Aperturef/8.0Unique Image ID4FB9A2107B00F541754E4ADBE2052CE6
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Still trying to finish my city in six.
Shoot on shitty Kodak EC 200.
Will not buy again.

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop LightroomImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:16 00:24:28
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
General consensus is to use what's best for the situation, I think. There are going to be a few primefags who say that anyone who uses a zoom is selling out to the Man or some shit like that, but they can safely be ignored.

I've got two zooms that I use when I've got abundant light and need the versatility to go from wide to moderate tele (or tele to long tele), and I've got two primes for when I need the extra photons or just feel like holding myself locked into one focal length for previsualization purposes.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>164737
My biggest issue is that I don't want to buy a zoom that I can only use on my dslr. I don't also want to fork over for a shitty consumer (read: non-L) zoom.

What kind of normal zooms, does /p/ happen to like? Anyone tried the Tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8?

Also, fingerprints.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwarePicasa 3.0PhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image Width1936Image Height1288Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:04:05 22:18:12Exposure Time1/160 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeAverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length100.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalUnique Image ID7be2b84754f6cfaf045f99a4bc44e67d
>> Anonymous
>>164736
is that Houston?
>> Anonymous
>>164742
Springfield, VA
>> Anonymous
>>164742
>>164745

Gotta love the sense of place interstates give, huh?
>> Anonymous
>>164759
Every fucking suburb is every other suburb.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Since I'm exposing myself here, c&c is appreciated.

I'm also nervous about posting portraits of friends.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:02 08:18:52Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/4.5Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/4.5Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo FlashFocal Length42.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
>>164740My biggest issue is that I don't want to buy a zoom that I can only use on my dslr. I don't also want to fork over for a shitty consumer

tamron 28-75 2.8, lose out on wide but that's what you get for using 35mm lenses on crop
>> Anonymous
>>164764
I have a 28-75 2.8 and I can attest it's a good lens. Also, from countless sample images, I realized the Sigma 24-70 is often soft in comparison.

Weight might be an issue with both lenses however; the Tamron is around 500g, and the Sigma is even worse. They're also big and a bit attention-drawing. Unless I'm on a job, I tend to opt for a simple 50mm F1.8 most of the time instead, for the discretion and light weight.
>> Anonymous
>>164771They're also big and a bit attention-drawing.

uh, the tamron 28-75 is pretty damn small

you haven't used a big standard zoom until you've used canon's 24-70 which is larger than a 70-200 when extended.
>> Anonymous
>>164771
How do you shoot street without being unobtrusive anyways?

If you've already got an slr, might as well add a 70-200 L right?

I always had the sense that if you are familiar with your subject, they won't care what you shoot with.
>> Anonymous
>>164776
Okay, a 24-70 or 70-200 is indeed pretty fucking big in comparison.

>>164779
Not talking about being obstrusive though, I mean being noticed etc etc.... candids etc. If the subject is familiar, any weapon's allowed.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Also, incidentally, all of your pictures in this thread are win. Looking forward to your city-in-six thread.
>> Anonymous
>>164776
This does not look good, as the sigma 24-70 is pretty much the same as the canon, pound per pound.
>> Anonymous
>>164786This does not look good, as the sigma 24-70 is pretty much the same as the canon, pound per pound.

Are you OP or what? I didn't see you say size was a concern.

But regardless, the Sigma 24-70 has never been a favorite. The Tamron 28-75 is superior to it in all aspects and this is coming from someone who would never buy a Tamron lens. The 17-50 is a little bit better but it won't work on 35mm or full frame.

The Tamron 28-75 is as small as it gets for a 2.8 zoom.
>> Anonymous
>>164794The Tamron 28-75 is as small as it gets for a 2.8 zoom.

I mean, as small as it gets for a 35mm 2.8 zoom. The 17-50 for crop is smaller, obviously.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>164784
Glad you like.
You might be the only one who wants to see my shots from blurryville.

Also: waiting patiently.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiCamera SoftwarePicasa 3.0PhotographerunknownImage-Specific Properties:Image Width1936Image Height1288Pixel CompositionRGBImage OrientationUnknownHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Data ArrangementChunky FormatImage Created2008:04:12 09:48:43Exposure Time1/800 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias0.4 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length35.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalUnique Image ID03ee282e626ea0eed44c0bacb7ac4b88
>> Anonymous
>>164794
>the Sigma 24-70 has never been a favorite
http://www.pbase.com/image/74381294

I don't really care much for the light and plasticly tamron build.
>> Anonymous
All you need is a good prime and very fast legs.
>> angrylittleboy !wrJcGUHncE
The Tamron 28-75 sounds good for a zoom lens, but your 35mm is already a good lens for street :)
>> Anonymous
>>165185

well, it's arguable that maybe sigma 24-70 are so happy they're always out shooting

but i've never seen a user say a good thing about it

see plenty of people enjoying their tamron 17-50 and 28-75
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I think I am just going to go for the reliable choice (50/1.4) I actually miss that focal length since my 50/1.8 shat itself.

Also: enjoy a fruit drink.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:20 15:38:34Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length100.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> A New Beginning Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
In case anyone still cares, I ended up buying the 24-70. I will see how this changes my shooting habits.

I'll try not to post test charts, but actual pictures.
Until then: See ya.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiPhotographerunknownMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.5Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:02 08:29:18Exposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating200Lens Aperturef/5.6Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePartialFlashNo FlashFocal Length78.00 mmRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Anonymous
enjoy your shitty ass sigma lens
>> Anonymous
>>165802
I'll probably kicking it to craigslist in a couple weeks, but let's be positive, okay?
>> Anonymous
>>165845

in all seriousness, do post samples here and remind us it's that lens for curious anon
>> Anonymous
>>165851
Will do.

I thought about becoming a namefag, but just in case my shots started to suck, I want to be able to pretend it's not me...
>> Anonymous
>>165920
/p/ already has enough tripfags.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>165920
Well, it's not like you can't switch names if they do.
>> Anonymous
>>165927
We can just play the dupe game, like on k5.
>> Anonymous
fuck. shit sux

>I was cleaning lens and preparing for shipping when I noticed what appears to be a small hair inside the lens. If you still want to try it out that is fine, otherwise I will refund your money.

>Sorry about this I should have seen this before putting on ebay. Just let be know.

I guess no lens. Fuck.
>> Anonymous
>>166951
small hair inside the lens doesn't mean shit. seriously.
>> Anonymous
In this focal range I currently own the Canon 24-70 2.8 L, and the Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS L. I also have the Canon 50 1.4 and the Canon 85 1.8.

The 2 zooms are almost always on my camera. However, the best shot I've ever taken was with the 85 1.8. I started out with only primes, but switched to high quality zooms for convenience since they produce awesome shots without switching lenses as much.

However, if I want a shot with the best possible quality (and you can really see the difference), then I go to my primes.

Also, there is some shot discipline with primes. The fixed focal length forces you to frame subjects in ways you probably wouldn't with the zooms.

tl;dr Buy both high quality zooms and high quality primes. After all, we're in this hobby for the gear anyways.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>166983
How many people own the Canon 24-70 2.8 L?

I save up for gear, but I don't really want to buy one $1100 lens when I can buy a medium quality alternative and pray for a good copy. I tend to spend my money oh bricks of film and lab fees anyways.
>> Anonymous
>>167129

Same kit as
>>166983

with a bonus, 17-40 F4L.