Comments on: Comparative Digital SLR Lens Review: Fast, Wide Aperture Lenses

By: mcbowler

mcbowler — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 08:11:00 +0000

Thanks for the post! I’m going to purchase the 30mm f1.4 Sigma now unless there is something better for the money.

By: PeterKBurian

PeterKBurian — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 13:16:49 +0000

Ranger: I guess you disagree with the “comparative” word in the title. That was an editorial decision.

But hopefully, the article will be food for thought for photo hobbyists who have been thinking of replacing an f/5.6-6.3 zoom.

Cheers! Peter

By: Enche Tjin

Enche Tjin — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:44:22 +0000

I think Canon 70-200mm f4 is not a fast aperture lens. IS help a bit to control hand shake but it is basically useless if you use it for school dance performance and indoor sports.

I also think 50-135mm and 50-150mm (sigma) is more suitable for DX in many occasions. Because in DX, most of the wide zoom lens ends 50mm, such as 18-55, 17-55mm and 16-50mm. So the 50-150mm complement it better than 70-200mm.

Unless you’re doing bird photography or other field photography, 50-135mm will serve u better in less weight and price. I’m pretty surprise that there are only third party lens maker make these lenses: Sigma 50-150mm and Tokina 50-135mm.

By: Ranger 9

Ranger 9 — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:09:58 +0000

I can’t help thinking that, particularly for a review focusing on “great light gathering ability,” it’s REALLY stretching it even to call these lenses comparable!

Most of my photography is under conditions that require a wide-aperture lens… and I can hardly think of any situations in which I might approach a situation thinking, “Let’s see, should I use my 70-200mm f/4 IS or my 30mm f/1.4?” Or where I’d have a choice between a 17-55/2.8 and a 70-200/2.8. Et cetera.

Usually the situation would dictate one or another, rendering the idea of a “comparison” dubious. For example, under conditions in which you need an f/1.4 lens, an f/4 lens isn’t going to cut it — IS or no IS.