I cant contain myself... - Page 2

Matblack · 03-06-2009, 17:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vertigo1

The 24-70L is my perfect walkabout lens, having a 10-22 to cover the wide end and a 70-200 for the longer so it fits perfectly. I've thought about hiring one but resist mainly because I know I'd have to buy one immediately.

My only issue with this lens is the lack of IS, which I find inexcusable at this price point. Rumours persist of an IS version but no-one really knows for sure.

What mid range zoom do you have at the moment?

MB

Toby · 03-06-2009, 18:36

Well I've just sold the 17-70 and bought a Sigma 24-60 EX to replace it with. You may have seen the relevant threads on TP

Pretty much a straight swap cost-wise.

The constant f/2.8 appealed to me and, as I have the 10-22 now, I didn't need the wide end of the 17-70 any more and could live with the 60-70 "gap".

Had a bit of a play with the 24-60 and first impressions are that it's ridiculously sharp at f/5.6 and above - incredibly impressed with its performance here. Slight downside is that it's quite a bit softer at f/2.8, mainly at the long end, which defeats the object a bit. Still happy with the change as at smaller apertures it's sharper than the 17-70 was plus it gives me the flexibility of wider apertures when I really need them but it's shame it's not sharper at f/2.8.

I realise most lenses are softer wide open but, having seen a lot of reports saying this particular one is usually as sharp wide open as it is stopped down, I've enquired with Sigma UK about getting it calibrated. They reckon they could improve things if I sent it in but say it could take 4-5 weeks as it's an older lens which they can't reprogram themselves and thus have to send test images to Sigma Japan who will send back a new circuit board for it. Hassle but they say this is all covered in their standard £33 calibration charge which is very reasonable.

Off to Le Mans next week so no time to send it in now but will use it out there, stopping down whenever possible and look at sending it in when I get back. My reasoning is that, if I can get this thing nice and sharp at f/2.8 then it'll stave off my cravings for the 24-70L for a fair while yet

Mark · 04-06-2009, 00:45

Lensesforhire, I presume?

I'd be interested to hear how that works out. Heard good things over at TP obviously but can't beat a personal recommendation.

I'm not planning on getting any more lenses for the forseeable future (with the possible exception of a nifty), but lens hire is certainly an option (I did consider hiring a 100-400 L, but I'm sure my 70-300 will be fine).

Toby · 04-06-2009, 07:44

The 100-400L is definitely an acquired taste. A colleague at work has one and I borrowed it when we went to the FIA GT at Silverstone last month. The push-pull zoom takes a lot of getting used to.

Mark · 04-06-2009, 08:21

That's no problem for me. I'm still getting used to manual zoom.

Toby · 04-06-2009, 10:23

A couple of samples of my Sigma at 60mm:

What it's capable of at f/8:

Soft as hell at f/2.8:

Will send it off to Sigma when I get back from France and see what they can do with it.

Matblack · 04-06-2009, 12:21

Hmmm that looks unusable at 2.8, thats a real shame, I'm sure its not right and Sigma will be able to do something but 3 weeks is a long time without a camera

MB

Stan_Lite · 04-06-2009, 13:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vertigo1

The 24-70L is my perfect walkabout lens, having a 10-22 to cover the wide end and a 70-200 for the longer so it fits perfectly. I've thought about hiring one but resist mainly because I know I'd have to buy one immediately.

That's pretty much my ideal bag of lenses - and what I aspire to in the future.

At the moment, I'm plodding along with the 18-55mm kit lens and a cheapo Sigma 55-200mm I picked up before I came away. Sadly, last night, three days into my trip out here, the shutter on my 300D finally gave up the ghost. It had been playing up a bit from a week before I came out here but was still usable. I didn't have time to get it repaired before I came out so I was hoping it would see me through but it wasn't to be.

I'm thinking that instead of paying to have it repaired straight away when I get back from Egypt, I might just go ahead with the upgrade to a 40D I was planning and get the 300D repaired at a later date. A second-hand 40D can be picked up for around £450 and a new one for around £600. My long term plan is to have the 40D with the above lenses (and probably a nifty fifty) as my main camera and get the 300D repaired and stick an 18-200mm IS on it and use it as a walkabout camera.

That's the ultimate plan anyway but it'll be a long process to get to that point. I still have a lot to learn in the meantime.

Matblack · 04-06-2009, 13:53

Why didn't you tell me you were having issues with the 300D Stan? It should be fine and if it wasn't when you recieved it then we need to come to some kind of arrangement about getting it fixed for you, I'd hate to anyone to think I was selling duff kit

MB

Stan_Lite · 04-06-2009, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matblack

Why didn't you tell me you were having issues with the 300D Stan? It should be fine and if it wasn't when you recieved it then we need to come to some kind of arrangement about getting it fixed for you, I'd hate to anyone to think I was selling duff kit

MB

Don't worry about it Matt. It's nothing you could have known about and I wouldn't think for one minute that you would have sold it to me if you'd known. I'm perfectly happy to pick up the tab myself - after all, you virtually gave the camera away at the price you gave it to me for. Even including the price for the repair, I still got a bargain so I want to hear no more nonsense about any "arrangement" regarding the repair.

For your information (and everybody else too), the camera was in perfect working order when I received it and worked well for the best part of a month before it started playing up. Now that I think about it, it only started having problems shortly after I had the sensor cleaned professionally at a local camera shop. It's not inconceivable that they may have damaged the shutter whilst cleaning the sensor - although it would be pretty nigh impossible to prove that. In light of all of the above, my conscience wouldn't allow me to agree to any sort of compensatory offer from you.

I appreciate your intent and I want to categorically state for everyone to read that you sold me what you considered to be a perfectly functioning camera at a price which makes "mates rates" look exorbitant and that I had the best part of a months trouble free operation from it before it developed a fault which may well have been caused by action I took (albeit, indirectly).

I should have made all of this clear in my original post and I sincerely apologise if my omission caused you any distress.

03-06-2009, 18:36	#12
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	Well I've just sold the 17-70 and bought a Sigma 24-60 EX to replace it with. You may have seen the relevant threads on TP Pretty much a straight swap cost-wise. The constant f/2.8 appealed to me and, as I have the 10-22 now, I didn't need the wide end of the 17-70 any more and could live with the 60-70 "gap". Had a bit of a play with the 24-60 and first impressions are that it's ridiculously sharp at f/5.6 and above - incredibly impressed with its performance here. Slight downside is that it's quite a bit softer at f/2.8, mainly at the long end, which defeats the object a bit. Still happy with the change as at smaller apertures it's sharper than the 17-70 was plus it gives me the flexibility of wider apertures when I really need them but it's shame it's not sharper at f/2.8. I realise most lenses are softer wide open but, having seen a lot of reports saying this particular one is usually as sharp wide open as it is stopped down, I've enquired with Sigma UK about getting it calibrated. They reckon they could improve things if I sent it in but say it could take 4-5 weeks as it's an older lens which they can't reprogram themselves and thus have to send test images to Sigma Japan who will send back a new circuit board for it. Hassle but they say this is all covered in their standard £33 calibration charge which is very reasonable. Off to Le Mans next week so no time to send it in now but will use it out there, stopping down whenever possible and look at sending it in when I get back. My reasoning is that, if I can get this thing nice and sharp at f/2.8 then it'll stave off my cravings for the 24-70L for a fair while yet __________________

04-06-2009, 07:44	#14
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	The 100-400L is definitely an acquired taste. A colleague at work has one and I borrowed it when we went to the FIA GT at Silverstone last month. The push-pull zoom takes a lot of getting used to. __________________

04-06-2009, 10:23	#16
Toby Absinthe Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,023	A couple of samples of my Sigma at 60mm: What it's capable of at f/8: Soft as hell at f/2.8: Will send it off to Sigma when I get back from France and see what they can do with it. __________________

04-06-2009, 12:21	#17
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Hmmm that looks unusable at 2.8, thats a real shame, I'm sure its not right and Sigma will be able to do something but 3 weeks is a long time without a camera MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

04-06-2009, 13:53	#19
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Why didn't you tell me you were having issues with the 300D Stan? It should be fine and if it wasn't when you recieved it then we need to come to some kind of arrangement about getting it fixed for you, I'd hate to anyone to think I was selling duff kit MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

04-06-2009, 00:45	#13
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Lensesforhire, I presume? I'd be interested to hear how that works out. Heard good things over at TP obviously but can't beat a personal recommendation. I'm not planning on getting any more lenses for the forseeable future (with the possible exception of a nifty), but lens hire is certainly an option (I did consider hiring a 100-400 L, but I'm sure my 70-300 will be fine).

04-06-2009, 08:21	#15
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	That's no problem for me. I'm still getting used to manual zoom.