Lens suggestion on 5d

[dirtyoldrag]

hi all,


I just got myself a canon 5d mark 1 and have yet to get a lens for it. I have been shooting film for 3 years on a nikonFE, 50mmf1.8, iso 100-400 and i love it. sometimes, i do find myself in lowlight situations when i am not able to achieve the shot, hence i think i need a fast lens(f2.8?). I usually shoot street, night, people, lil landscape and would be doing weddings. I like to shoot wide/low light but i think a flash is a bit intrusive&distracting but i think i'll eventually get to that. Any 3rd party prime/zoom lens is fine, preferably not a L lens as i can't afford it right now. I know one lens cant do all, so i'm guessing bout 2-3lens, i'd do fine, but i would like to know which lens should i get first and eventually get to getting the next lens. I've been looking at canon, Sigma, tamron and they all tells me that their f2.8 lens are always soft at their widest. is it really that unbearable? Please gimme some suggestions. Thanks!


and one more point, is it worth it to get an adaptor for my 50mmf1.8 or should i just get a canon ef50f1.8mark2?





Cheers!

[Chuck Lee]

Mr. Rag,


Put a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 DI on your 5D. Excellent lens.


Bryans copy wasn't as good as this one: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/49/cat/23 thier comments when comparing to the EF 24-70 f2.8: "As if to raise a few eyebrows, the Tamron lens is actually a hair sharper than the Canon competition, across all apertures and focal lengths."


You may need to test a couple to get a really good copy. I've owned two in my short photo career. A Canon mount thatmatches theIQof my EF 28-75 f2.8 L and a Pentax mount that was as sharp as sharp can get. In fact it was the first lens I bought to replace/compliment the 18-55 kit lens. The only con I can find is that the AF is a tad slower and less acurate than the L class lenses.


Around a 3rd the price of a 24-70 L with equal IQ, anda 6 year warranty. What's not to like?


My2Abes,


Chuck

[dirtyoldrag]

,,,

[clemmb]

I second the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 DI recommendation. I have this lens and a 5D MkI as well. I shoot nothing but 'L' now but if 'L' is too much money, and I totally understand that, then the Tamron is the way to go. When I started out with DSLR I purchased a Sigma 24-70 f2.8. I hated it. Way too soft at all f's especially at 2.8. I upgraded to the Tamron and it is much better. A little soft at 2.8 but not bad. Stop down 1/3 and it is very sharp. You'll love the 5D as well.
Mark

[piiooo]

When I started out with DSLR I purchased a Sigma 24-70 f2.8. I hated it.

Sigma just released new, HSM edition of this lens, supposedly much better. I think it may be worth looking into.

[Mark Elberson]

When I started out with DSLR I purchased a Sigma 24-70 f2.8. I hated it.

Sigma just released new, HSM edition of this lens, supposedly much better. I think it may be worth looking into.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS is $899.00 at B&amp;H. I'd rather spend the extra $290 and get the Canon L. The Tamron on the other hand is a measly $389.95 [:P]

[dirtyoldrag]

i read that the sigma is not as good as the tamron, and that tokina is actually evn better than the tamron?

[Julius]

I would get a 24-105 mm f4 L IS USM lens which you will most probably be able to use 90% of the time.

[Chuck Lee]

Mr. Rag,


Which Tokina are you refering to? The Tokina AF 28-70mm f/2.8-2.6 AT-X Pro II has been discontinued.


Adorama has a used Tok 28-70 SV (the original) for $299.99.


I read on photozone.dethat most if not all Tokina lenses suffer from harsh CA pollution. I'd be intersted to see some high contrast shots with Sean's new 11-16.Pentax has rebranded some Tokina developed lenses that exhibit the same CA issues. It's the Tokina "finger print" so to say.


Just as a disclaimer, I'm not discounting a lens based on CA quality. The 11-16 produces the highest MTF figures for a lens in it's class. I have a discontinued EF 17-35 f2.8L that I really like. It produces green/red CA in high contrast situations. It does not purple fringe which is a common CA sympton with older film lenses. The green/red that is produced by my 17-35 is very easy to clean up during raw processing with SilkyPix. So, for me, it makes no difference. It's just part of the normal process.


The nicer Tamrons (28-75 f2.8 DI and 17-50 f2.8 DII) that I have used have never produced any noticeable CA. Tamron seems to do an excellent job with their coatings on this class of lens. The less expensive class like the 70-300 f4-5.6Di LD Macro can at times produced very nasty purple fringing CA. That kind of CA is the hardest and most time consuming that I have found to clean up.


This CA issue can be extremely important if you are shooting straight to Jpeg and not doing any post processing. Some people will never pay any attention to it but I've been doing this long enough (and thus gotten way too picky)to see how dramatic an effect it can have on a finished image. This issue isexacerbatedwith FF and ultra wides.


AFewMoreAbes,


Chuck

[Benjamin]

The [url="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/596257-REG/Sigma_571101_24_70mm_f_2_8_IF_EX.html]Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS[/url] is $899.00 at B&amp;H. I'd rather spend the extra $290 and get the Canon L. The Tamron on the other hand is a measly $389.95 [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

The Sigma is indeed very good according to a detailed review which I don't remember where I have seen it. It's slightly better than the Canon optically. Sigma these years seems to be very ambitious, their 50/1.4, 150/2.8 Macro, 24-70/2.8 HSM all seem to compete head to head with Canon and Nikon optics.


All I'm saying here is that I think Sigma does have a reason to sell their new 24-70 lens at such a price, but I agree with you - for that much money I'd rather get my 2nd copy of Canon 24-70L...