Photography Lab THIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE!
A place to display digital masterpieces, enhance photography skills, photoshop, and share photo tips with one another... |
 | | 
02-02-2012, 09:12 PM
|
#1351 | | Get Money, Get Paid
Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Richmond
Posts: 2,285
Thanked 1,264 Times in 262 Posts
Failed 55 Times in 19 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by ddr  nothing exciting unless they improved on flare resistance. what kind of price cuts are you guys expecting to decide to pull the trigger? | Scored a Tokina 11-16 tonight for a cool $500 
Previous owner barely used it, and it shows. Could have fooled me for a new one.  | 
|  | |
02-02-2012, 09:33 PM
|
#1352 | | I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 3,829
Thanked 6,590 Times in 1,166 Posts
Failed 68 Times in 23 Posts
|
good price!
| |
| | |
02-02-2012, 09:53 PM
|
#1353 | | 2010 RS Top Food Critic Winner
Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,410
Thanked 694 Times in 233 Posts
Failed 102 Times in 16 Posts
|
great buy!
| |
| | |
02-02-2012, 10:35 PM
|
#1354 | | Rs has made me the man i am today!
Join Date: May 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,148
Thanked 1,053 Times in 595 Posts
Failed 21 Times in 13 Posts
|
damnnn nothing like that for Canon 
can't beat that price!
| |
| | |
02-02-2012, 10:39 PM
|
#1355 | | Snapping away
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,920
Thanked 97 Times in 84 Posts
Failed 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
werd. awesome price!
| |
| | |
02-02-2012, 11:13 PM
|
#1356 | | My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: RevScene.net
Posts: 1,889
Thanked 1,284 Times in 420 Posts
Failed 238 Times in 105 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Volvoman Scored a Tokina 11-16 tonight for a cool $500
Previous owner barely used it, and it shows. Could have fooled me for a new one. |  Jealous | |
| | |
02-03-2012, 08:08 PM
|
#1357 | | resident Oil Guru
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,716
Thanked 10,457 Times in 1,794 Posts
Failed 1,065 Times in 267 Posts
|
Best DX wide angle IMO. ! Well done.
| |
| | |
02-08-2012, 11:29 PM
|
#1358 | | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: YVR
Posts: 4,518
Thanked 1,275 Times in 434 Posts
Failed 62 Times in 24 Posts
|
Hey guys, I'm looking at getting a new lens to fill in some gaps on the wider end.
Right now I still have a 50mm 1.4 and a 85mm 1.8.
I bought a Nikon 16-35mm but I'm not too sure if I really really love the lens. Granted, I've only had for a few hours. I was thinking maybe returning it and getting something like the 24-70mm or the 11-16mm (but I'm not sure if that'll be too wide) I won't really have anything between 16 and 50.
I love my primes though, they're great for taking pictures of things and portraits but I need something that's wide and has a bit of a zoom (not telephoto, but just a difference in focal length). I would stick to saving up for more primes but I like having a "do it all lens" once in a while.
I used to have a 24mm 2.8 and a 35mm 1.8 as well. Shooting with primes lets me explore my creativeness a bit more but yeah looking for a somewhat "do it all lens" now lol.
Thanks!
| |
| | |
02-08-2012, 11:46 PM
|
#1359 | | Snapping away
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,920
Thanked 97 Times in 84 Posts
Failed 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
since you already have a long prime, a good walk-around would be the nikon 17-55 or the sigma 17-50 OS. the 16-35 is made more for a FF isn't it? like a wide walk-around. strictly speaking about focal lengths, it's just less useful than the usual crop walk-arounds. i never saw the appeal of a 24-70 on a crop. i didn't mention the popular tamron because you're probably used to the sharpness of those primes. if you're willing to compromise even more, a lot of ppl like the sigma 17-70 f/4 as well.
i've never heard of anyone complaining about a lens being too wide =p. unless you're really anal about distortion. 1mm is quite a difference on a crop. as stated before, the 11-16 is a wonderful lens. others have opted for a greater focal range i.e. 10-22 so it can be their wide walk-around (like a 16-35 on a FF).
| |
| | |
02-09-2012, 03:03 AM
|
#1360 | | Kick' In' Duh' Bass
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 2,619
Thanked 1,692 Times in 405 Posts
Failed 434 Times in 65 Posts
|
You can also check out the 16-85mm. It covers good ranges and pretty damn sharp even at 85mm. I love mine  Posted via RS Mobile | |
| | |
02-09-2012, 12:50 PM
|
#1361 | | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: YVR
Posts: 4,518
Thanked 1,275 Times in 434 Posts
Failed 62 Times in 24 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by ddr since you already have a long prime, a good walk-around would be the nikon 17-55 or the sigma 17-50 OS. the 16-35 is made more for a FF isn't it? like a wide walk-around. strictly speaking about focal lengths, it's just less useful than the usual crop walk-arounds. i never saw the appeal of a 24-70 on a crop. i didn't mention the popular tamron because you're probably used to the sharpness of those primes. if you're willing to compromise even more, a lot of ppl like the sigma 17-70 f/4 as well.
i've never heard of anyone complaining about a lens being too wide =p. unless you're really anal about distortion. 1mm is quite a difference on a crop. as stated before, the 11-16 is a wonderful lens. others have opted for a greater focal range i.e. 10-22 so it can be their wide walk-around (like a 16-35 on a FF). | I've had the Tamron 17-50mm in the past as well and I didn't really like how it would always miss focus or take a long time to focus. Images were quite nice when it hit the focus though :P.
How is the sigma 17-50mm without OS? Is it just as good? And yea, I've read that the 16-35mm was a lot better on the FF cameras but I wanted to give it a go anyways, but now I kind of regret it.
I'm not really anal about distortion, I just thought that it would be too wide for what I'll be using it for.
The 16-85mm is catching my eye too now lol.
How is the sigma 10-20mm 3.5-5.6? Is it nice and sharp or should I be looking for the 10-20mm 3.5.
I'm thinking of getting either a used Nikon 17-55mm or a 16-85mm and either the Sigma 10-20mm or the Tokina 11-16. That way I'll have my ultrawide and a good wideangle lens too.
| |
| | |
02-09-2012, 01:05 PM
|
#1362 | | I am grateful grapefruit
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Failed 83 Times in 11 Posts
|
The Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 is really good value. It's not a very sharp lens, but pictures come out decently. If you want an upgrade from it - go for the Tokina 11-16, skip the Sigma F3.5 completely. The tokina is just a little more and is a better lens.
__________________
Proud member of GRAPE Great Revscene Action Photographers Enthusiasts | |
| | |
02-09-2012, 01:05 PM
|
#1363 | | Snapping away
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,920
Thanked 97 Times in 84 Posts
Failed 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
the sigma with good review is the 17-50 with OS. imo it's worth it to get in canada and local as you can check the lens and get the 10 year warranty. it is much cheaper in the US though ...
i think i read the slower 10-20 sigma is actually sharper than the faster version. the aperture is not as big of a deal to me now that i know I like to shoot wide pictures on a tripod most of the time with a smaller aperture. it depends on your uses. the large aperture and current used price of the tokina is very appealing of course.
depending on how much available light situations you encounter, i think you can get away with the 16-85 as it has VR and you have decently fast primes.
| |
| | |
02-09-2012, 09:52 PM
|
#1364 | | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: YVR
Posts: 4,518
Thanked 1,275 Times in 434 Posts
Failed 62 Times in 24 Posts
|
Not that good of a deal but I found someone selling the 11-16 for $550 
Still looking for a 16-85 now. After all this I'll still have some money left over from the 16-35mm purchase lol.
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 09:48 AM
|
#1365 | | Rs has made me the man i am today!
Join Date: May 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,148
Thanked 1,053 Times in 595 Posts
Failed 21 Times in 13 Posts
|
Are there any glaring issues with the Canon 10-22 aside from price? From what I understand (from reading reviews) the major issues with each of the usual suspects are the following:
Sigma 10-20: not sharp, some flare issues
Tokina 11-16: limited range, some really big flare issues
Canon 10-22: price is absurd, build quality is much worse than the previous 2
I'm partial to the 10-20/10-22 because of the extended focal length compared to the Tokina, plus the difference between 10 and 11mm is significant imo. I'm expecting a fairly good tax return, so hopefully money won't be an issue when I need to purchase a UWA.
Any thoughts?
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 10:32 AM
|
#1366 | | Get Money, Get Paid
Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Richmond
Posts: 2,285
Thanked 1,264 Times in 262 Posts
Failed 55 Times in 19 Posts
|
For me, I find I never zoom away from 11mm with my Tokina, so focal range isn't a huge issue for me. If you are hand holding shots at night, the f2.8 will help, but if you are landscape shooting with a tripod, I would go with the Sigma 10-20.
Have you considered the Sigma 8-16 f4.5? 8mm is stupid wide, check flickr for some sample images.
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 12:20 PM
|
#1367 | | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: right here
Posts: 4,973
Thanked 4,783 Times in 830 Posts
Failed 884 Times in 162 Posts
|
as always, if you need the speed, that's what you have to consider. i shot a lot of indoor architecture, hand held mostly. could not do it without the Tokina f/2.8.
and conversely, always had issues with my Canon 17-40 f/4.
__________________
now what?
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 12:29 PM
|
#1368 | | I *Fwap* *Fwap* *Fwap* to RS
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: vancouver
Posts: 1,580
Thanked 2,169 Times in 249 Posts
Failed 404 Times in 66 Posts
|
i was thinking about going with just primes
im using a 60d
right now i have a 50mm f 1.8 (will upgrade to 1.4), 70-200 f4L is(eventually upgrade to a 2.8L is)
i was thinking about getting the 17-55 f2.8 is or the 17-40 f4L (leaning more towards the 17-55
but now im considering getting the new canon 28mm f2.8 usm is, or the 24mm f2.8 usm is
what do you think?
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 12:34 PM
|
#1369 | | Rs has made me the man i am today!
Join Date: May 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,148
Thanked 1,053 Times in 595 Posts
Failed 21 Times in 13 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Volvoman Have you considered the Sigma 8-16 f4.5? 8mm is stupid wide, check flickr for some sample images. | I have, but knowing my clumsy self, that bulbous front element would be an issue. Also, no easy way of putting filters is a turn-off, especially for landscapes.
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 12:57 PM
|
#1370 | | VLS Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vancouver
Posts: 16,351
Thanked 2,591 Times in 832 Posts
Failed 61 Times in 19 Posts
|
The Canon 10-22 is somewhat soft unless it's stopped down quite a bit. I think it's too pricey for its performance.
__________________
2007 Volvo V50
Taken by ex: 2005 Toyota Prius.
R.I.P. 1997 Lexus ES300. 
R.I.P. 1989 Acura Legend Coupe LS.
| |
| | |
02-10-2012, 01:15 PM
|
#1371 | | Rs has made me the woman i am today!
Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Richmond
Posts: 4,458
Thanked 47 Times in 16 Posts
Failed 0 Times in 0 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by m3thods Are there any glaring issues with the Canon 10-22 aside from price? From what I understand (from reading reviews) the major issues with each of the usual suspects are the following:
Sigma 10-20: not sharp, some flare issues
Tokina 11-16: limited range, some really big flare issues
Canon 10-22: price is absurd, build quality is much worse than the previous 2
I'm partial to the 10-20/10-22 because of the extended focal length compared to the Tokina, plus the difference between 10 and 11mm is significant imo. I'm expecting a fairly good tax return, so hopefully money won't be an issue when I need to purchase a UWA.
Any thoughts? | Quote:
Originally Posted by Senna4ever The Canon 10-22 is somewhat soft unless it's stopped down quite a bit. I think it's too pricey for its performance. | I have the 10-22 and have to agree that it is a little on the softer side wide open, I got mine for about $600 pretty much brand new so I can't complain too much. Otherwise I would've spend my money on the Tokina.
I do love my Canon 10-22 on my crop though. It's definitely one of my most fun lens. I rarely find the need for anything faster than f4.
| |
| | |
02-13-2012, 08:55 AM
|
#1372 | | RS has made me the bitter person i am today!
Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: VanCity/HCMC/HK
Posts: 4,760
Thanked 694 Times in 235 Posts
Failed 112 Times in 48 Posts
|
Trying to stay true to sigma.... looking for the 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro but sources say it has been discontinued...do you guys know anything similar in qualities and same price range?? for a Nikon 4/3.
__________________
"Just because any car nut can tell you every possible performance specification of a Ferrari doesn't mean he can drive. Most of these people live in places where they've never even seen a Ferrari, much less ever owned one themselves."
| |
| | |
02-13-2012, 09:37 AM
|
#1373 | | Rs has made me the man i am today!
Join Date: May 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,148
Thanked 1,053 Times in 595 Posts
Failed 21 Times in 13 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Supafly Trying to stay true to sigma.... looking for the 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro but sources say it has been discontinued...do you guys know anything similar in qualities and same price range?? for a Nikon 4/3. | There's always the Tamron 17-50 non-VC. Should be the same price as the 18-50, and in most cases it's a sharper lens. It also should still be available both new and used.
| |
| | |
02-22-2012, 10:24 AM
|
#1374 | | Rs has made me the man i am today!
Join Date: May 2008 Location: Burnaby
Posts: 3,148
Thanked 1,053 Times in 595 Posts
Failed 21 Times in 13 Posts
|
In case anyone is shopping around for a UWA (like I was  )
830 tax in for a Canon 10-22. Local (Best Buy). Only 3 left online (with stock in Langley and Abbotsford) Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Lens : Wide-Angle Lenses - Best Buy Canada | |
| | |
02-22-2012, 12:38 PM
|
#1375 | | The Brown Reason
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Whalley
Posts: 4,607
Thanked 5,863 Times in 1,525 Posts
Failed 221 Times in 97 Posts
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Supafly Trying to stay true to sigma.... looking for the 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro but sources say it has been discontinued...do you guys know anything similar in qualities and same price range?? for a Nikon 4/3. | It is discontinued. I have one, and I really like it lots of little problems with them though, a lot of which are very common (i.e. back focusing, stuck apertures). Keep watching craigslist and if you find one that isn't perfect sigma's repair centre in ontario is pretty easy to deal with.
__________________ Quote: |
Originally Posted by bcrdukes fuck this shit, i'm out | | |
| | | |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:45 AM.
|
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
