A new lens for me. Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS..

Started Jan 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
dotweb
Senior MemberPosts: 1,586Gear list
Like?
Re: A new lens for me. Sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS..
In reply to joger, Jan 21, 2013

joger wrote:

dotweb wrote:

Sorry, but what is the point comparing the Sigma 120-300mm against the Canon 135mm?

very simple - that was the answer to the bokeh question - and I am not talking about the image quality here.

It was mentioned that a f/2.8 zoom is better then a f/4.0 zoom (which is obvious btw) and then I brought in the 135 f72.0 which has again better bokeh - far better to be presice

I've treid to explain how I see the whole zoom-thing in brief words.

  1. When I travel lean - I want to have the least possible weight while maintaining the utmost image quality that's possible - or in a crowded place where I can only carry one lens
  2. When I am not traveling lean I have the option to use whatever suits best for the task

Everyone might come to a different conclusion. Convenience is not my aim - thus zoom or primes is a question that does not raise for me.
Let's think for a moment hat all you'll ever need from a zoom is the lower and upper end of the focal length - what about owning two DSLRs - one with the long and one with the short end - I've seen that at official events from PROs a lot - and I do it the same way.
If I really want the utmost bokeh a f/2.8 zoom might not be good enough knowing the quality of the 135 f/2.0 - but if I want to travel lean a f/4.0 zoom might be just good enough - not being much worse compare to a f/2.8 zoom - in other words good enough but significantly lighter.
Out of the box thinking
I see rather seldom a Pro with only a zoom on the camera for formula 1 - they all carry multiple cameras with dedicated lenses for the job - that's what I do too

Image was captured from the McLaren VIP lounge at the last Nuerburgring formula 1 race - btw I rather seldom see 3rd party lenses even though they are significantly cheaper

-- hide signature --

__________________________________
isn’t it funny, a ship that leaks from the top
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein

It is not always about bokeh - and I can see that all the PRO on your picture has at least one zoom hanging down and there is only one zoom at 400mm and its 5.6 so we can leave that one out. Again canon do have a zoom with F2.8 above 200mm, and most pro shooting do not pay them self - its that easy. Even I have a canon 300 2.8, I can see lots of good reasons for the Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 - not because of bokeh but the amount of light it lets in to my camera, and the zoom function that is perfect for shooting from hides (nature photography) etc etc etc.

There are several third party lenses that covers areas that are not covered by Canon.

By the way - I am a pro, or at least I make my living from it, and I use mostly zooms if I can get away with it.

//Steen

-- hide signature --

Steen
dotweb.dk
EF 24-70 2.8 L / EF 70-200 2.8 L / EF 100-400 4.5 L / EF 24-105 4.0 L/1D Mark IV / 60D /Tamron 17-55mm 2.8 / SLIK 700 pro AMT/Olympus gear E-1/E-3

 dotweb's gear list:dotweb's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Olympus E-400 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
OOFNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow