Sigma, more people seem to like the Sigma APO than the equivalent Canons although these consumer level lenses seem to have more sample-to-sample variability than most. In the Sigma line: avoid the non-APO version (formerly known as the DL.) Most users think that the extra money for the APO version is worth it.Īs for Canon vs. So is your suggestion to consider a $900 lens or a $1000 lens really helpful? If you must attempt to talk them out of a cheap lens, at least explain why the 5x cost is worth the difference.Įnough griping bout your answer, here is mine: Think about what this person is asking: he's asking if he should buy the " Sigma DG Macro Autofocus Lens ($140 at B&H) or the Canon 90-300 F4.5/ 5.6 (the US model equivalent is the 75-300 that costs $150 at B&H.)
You might want to consider the Sigma 100-300mm EX.it's an f4.0Īnother option would be the 80-400mm EX OS (optically stabilized) That you can't afford better glass right now, that would be the one If the Canonįocuses faster and you need that capability (sports), then assuming The Sigma does tend to be a slower focusing lens. It's a ton more money than either of your choices. John gave an excellent suggestion with the 100-300 EX. Same concept for basketball, soccer, hockey, steeple-chase, car races, etc.you know where the action is going to take place, so get a focus lock there and wait. Some photos taken with my SD10 and the 80-400mm EX OS: For baseball and softball, things can be pretty predictable.a batter will attempt to hit the ball, so get a focus lock on the batter and shoot, shoot, shoot.a runner on 1st will try and steal 2nd, so get a focus lock on 2nd base and wait for them to go. While focusing can be slow, I think for sports photography you really need to pick a spot and wait for the action. I had considered the cost as well, but I figured it's a one time expense and why not go for the quality.as long as Canon does not change it's mount, that lens will be used for a long time and give many quality photos.
0 kommentar(er)
