24-xx for film & digital

I currently own EOS300V & Minolta XE-7 film-SLRs, but I'm planning to add a Canon digital body to my lineup within the next year. My current gear includes EF 50 mm II and Sigma 24-70 f3.5-5.6. The image quality of the latter is not bad but the EF 50 mm II really makes the Sigma look pretty average.

I plan to shoot both film and digital in the future and while having almost bought the Tamron 28-75, the loss of wide angle makes me wonder if there's somthing available (or in the works) from around 24mm onwards in the Tamron price range that could be used in both Canon film & digital bodies?

I know there's the EF 24-70L, but it's out of the question for well-known reasons.. sigh

By all accounts there's a new Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Sigma which is quite nice. Don't have it myself but there are lots of posts about it over on the Lens forum.

Perttu Luukkanen said:

I currently own EOS300V & Minolta XE-7 film-SLRs, but I'm planning
to add a Canon digital body to my lineup within the next year. My
current gear includes EF 50 mm II and Sigma 24-70 f3.5-5.6. The
image quality of the latter is not bad but the EF 50 mm II really
makes the Sigma look pretty average.

I plan to shoot both film and digital in the future and while
having almost bought the Tamron 28-75, the loss of wide angle makes
me wonder if there's somthing available (or in the works) from
around 24mm onwards in the Tamron price range that could be used in
both Canon film & digital bodies?

I know there's the EF 24-70L, but it's out of the question for
well-known reasons.. sigh

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/mrdazzler/

There are a couple of pretty good ones.

The Canon 24-85/3.5-4.5 USM is IMO one of Canon's all-round most successful lenses: it's compact, handles very well, focuses fast, and the optical qualities are where it counts -- it's got contrast and flare handling that's very, very nearly in L class, and only loses out in sharpness to them wide-open. Of course, it's not f/2.8, but then again you don't pay the price (weight and €€€) for f/2.8 either.

Second, Sigma has a whole bevy of 24-something f/2.8 zooms. I've lost count of them, but I've seen some pretty good sample shots from them; from what I know, they appear to be in the same class optically, and of course they're brighter (and bigger).

My pick would probably be the Canon -- for a "walkaround lens" like this I'd prefer the lighter weight, compact build and solid shootability over the extra stop. Optically all are very good.

Petteri
--
Me on photography: [ http://www.prime-junta.tk ]
Me on politics: [ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]

mr dazzler said:

By all accounts there's a new Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Sigma which is quite
nice. Don't have it myself but there are lots of posts about it
over on the Lens forum.

Click to expand...

Is it so? the last time a read reviews was last spring and I saw lots of comments and sample pics that it's not comparable in sharpness to the Tamron 28-75 or EF 24-70L. Is there a new version around?

I'm familiar with the EF 24-85, but I'd appreciate f/2.8 since it's really dark here in the north most ot the winter. It's not really an option to stop down to f/8 to get sharp images. I've occasionally had to use the 50 mm at 1.8 to get hand-holdable exposures with 400 ASA film.

Yep, there's a new sigma 24-70. Look at the Japanese website. The US website doesn't have it listed yet (still advertising the old one).

Sharpness of the new Sigma is similar to the Tamron 28-75 and the Canon L. On the downside, minimum focusing distance is still 40cm. So the Tamron can focus 7cm nearer + it is 5mm more on the long end - for macro work, the Tamron is better.

On the other hand, the Sigma gives you 4mm more on the wide end, which is very useful for indoor work.

So do you prefer macro + light weight (Tamron), or do you prefer wider (new Sigma)?

Perttu Luukkanen said:

mr dazzler said:

By all accounts there's a new Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Sigma which is quite
nice. Don't have it myself but there are lots of posts about it
over on the Lens forum.

Click to expand...

Is it so? the last time a read reviews was last spring and I saw
lots of comments and sample pics that it's not comparable in
sharpness to the Tamron 28-75 or EF 24-70L. Is there a new version
around?

I'm familiar with the EF 24-85, but I'd appreciate f/2.8 since it's
really dark here in the north most ot the winter. It's not really
an option to stop down to f/8 to get sharp images. I've
occasionally had to use the 50 mm at 1.8 to get hand-holdable
exposures with 400 ASA film.

Click to expand...

--
View my photo library at:
http://www.vizero.com/php/photographer.php?id=1

I can't read it either... but the numbers and pictures do the talking:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/lens/standardzoom/24_70_28.htm

--
View my photo library at:
http://www.vizero.com/php/photographer.php?id=1

Duane Bong said:

I can't read it either... but the numbers and pictures do the talking:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/lens/standardzoom/24_70_28.htm

Click to expand...

Doesn't sound too bad, I guess this is the same stuff in English.

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/standardzoom/24_70_28.htm

According to the site it's been around since September. Have I failed to hear all the oohs and aahs in this forum, or is it really on par with the Tamron?

I'd certainly be happy to bear the weight for the extra 4 mm in the wide end if it's optically as good as the competition.

you can view a few test shots here:

http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/sigma_2470

i have all 3 (sigma, tamron, canonL) and all give good results. there are pros and cons of each but overall very hard to tell the difference. i really like the new sigma EX a lot personally.