Does Canon have a similar lens to this one ...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by igmolinav, Apr 9, 2009.

  1. igmolinav macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #1
  2. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
  3. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
  4. igmolinav thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #5
    Hi,

    Thank you for your repplies. I am working with digital, so the 17-85mm. seems like a good option.
    It is just a shame that because of the 1.6x factor, it doesn't
    get to be as wide as with the Lens for Nikon.

    Kind regards,

    igmolinav.
     
  5. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #6
    Most Nikon bodies have a 1.5x crop factor -- is the difference such a deal breaker?

    Also consider the 16-35mm and 10-22mm Canon options.
     
  6. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #7
    The 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS doesn't have the most amazing reputation.

    Sigma has a new lens that might be a good choice:

    http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3359&navigator=6

    It's and 18-50 f/2.8-4.5 lens. It doesn't have as wide a zoom range (which will probably mean less barrel distortion at the wide end and better sharpness at the long end. It's also 2/3 to a stop faster than the Nikon and Canon lenses, and is probably more solidly built. It's a new lens so reviews aren't out yet.

    Another option on the Canon is the 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS. It's so much less than these other options that it's worth considering. Use the difference to get a flash or put more money into other lenses you're considering.

    Are you looking at lens review sites? See the sticky at the top of this forum for some good ones.

    Is image stabilization essential?
     
  7. igmolinav thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    #8
    Hi,

    Thank you very much for your answers again : ) !!!

    IS can be helpful for me. I tend to do quite a bit of
    photoshooting with low light.

    The Sigma lens looks like a good alternative. I'll
    wait for some reviews to come out. Hopefully the
    lens will not be too soft like some Sigmas that I
    have had.

    Kind regards,

    igmolinav.
     
  8. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
  9. jons macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    #10
    Go with the 16-35mm 2.8L, you won't be sorry.
     
  10. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #11
    Canon has this one:
    EF 24-105 f/4 ISL (~$1029 ). The following link shows most Canon lenses, and most other lenses for Canon cameras from other manufacturers (Sigma Tamron, etc.).

    However, not all lenses that can be used with Canon EOS mounts (Leitz lenses, Pentax, Nikon, Vivitar, etc.) are shown.
    http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141406
     
  11. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #12
    Fantastic. Except he wants an equivalent to Nikon's 16-85, especially at the wide end. It seems Canon does not have an identical lens, rather some broadly similar ones.
     
  12. Experiment13 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    #13
    Sony Zeiss 16 - 80mm = incredible pictures

    Everyone on this forum seems to believe that Nikon and Canon are the only cameras made. Sony (was Konica-Minolta) has what might be called the best carry around DSLR lens made. Check reviews for the Sony Zeiss 16 - 80mm (24 - 120mm equivalent) f3.5-4.5. Stabilization is built into the camera. The lens is extremely sharp with wonderful colors. I had one and it drew beautiful pictures. Look at pictures in dpreview or flickr that have been taken by this lens.

    I regrettably sold it and bought the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 for low light portraits. It cannot really be beat. The 135mm Zeiss f1.8 is even better.

    Sony has good cameras, makes the sensors for Nikon and others, and is the only brand that has access to autofocus Zeiss prime or zoom lenses. Worth every penny. One can, though, buy manual Zeiss lenses for Nikon, Pentax, and Canon.

    BTW My normal-wide angle range is also Zeiss, only on a Leica M8.
     
  13. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #14
    That Zeiss lens sounds pretty unimpressive to me, actually. $750 for a plastic, variable aperture f/3.5-4.5 lens that you have to manually switch from AF to MF to focus manually?

    SLRgear's review:

     

Share This Page