davidv Loc: salt lake city utah

I know canon has the L lens that is there pro model. Does sigma and tamaron have pro lenses ? All new to this thing.Thank you

shadow1284 Loc: Mid-West Michigan

As a long time amateur, I've looked long and hard at lens specs. I now own the canon 7d. I believe a pro lens is one that would satisfy the needs of a pro photographer. A professional photographer usually needs and wants a lens that shoots fast in low light, one that has a fast(low f stop) aperture, weather sealed, with good glass that creates sharp images. They have always cost far more than I can afford. Although I do own a canon 50 f1.4 and a Tamron 60 F2.0 macro along with 3 other adequate lenses.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

No Sigma do not need a pro lens they are all GOOD

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Sigma uses the "EX" designation on their best lenses, they also come with a longer warranty period.

Stef C Loc: Conshohocken (near philly) PA

I've been thinking about this for Nikon. It's actually pretty clear..all of the best Nikons have a gold ring around the front..

davidv Loc: salt lake city utah

Thank you for clearing this up. So with this said,is the photo going to be that much better with the more expensive lens? Or is most of it the build quality? Water proof,longer warranty. I am just getting into photography and don't want to wast money on a lens that won't make a big difference in my photos.

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

A big factor here is what "new to photography" means. For those who are really just getting started and are still wrestling with understanding exposure, DOF, etc., investing in a really expensive lens might be jumping the gun. The lens alone is not going to make a significant difference in that case. Better to work with the kit lens that came with your camera for a while, and concentrate on building your skill set, having fun, and discovering what you really enjoy photographing. Then somewhere down the line invest in the lens that will fit your interests (a top quality macro lens if you love macro photography - a long telephoto if you have become passionate about wildlife photography, etc.). You'll know when your skills have reached the point of needing the expensive gear.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Davidv, many photographers use the corporate lenses since often they are considered to be of high quality. Where the aftermarket shines is in making niche lenses. Those are zooms in a larger range or primes with features that are very expensive in the corporate lenses as well as zooms in ranges that the big companies just don't bother making.
Not everyone needs the build and IQ of an L lens.
Many of the aftermarket lenses have similar glass without the expensive builds at very reasonable prices. But in the end, you get what you pay for. Also L glass holds extraordinarily high resale values. Just look at used ones.
When planning on a new lens, do your homework and read, read, read and ask, ask, ask, and get exactly what you need.

Take 5 Cinema Loc: Canoe BC

I once saw a great video where they compared the best Canon zooms to Zeiss primes. NO Comparison. Not even close. Zeiss was cleaner, clearest, sharper, better color, better contrast - in a word, just gorgeous.

Quite the eye opener for me. Sold.

But there are other considerations as well. That boketh in the background or foreground is a deal breaker for me. I want a lovely soft, buttery smooth blur there and many lenses simply don't cut it. The boketh is harsh, not soft, made up of numerous other shapes from 2-4 - ugly. Toss the lens.

There there is something about the clarity in the corners. Many lenses fall apart here - look in close and you will see color fringing into reds and blues. Yuck - toss that lens. Then there is flare control when you point the camera into light sources. Does it ghost up the picture or remain reasonably clean - few lenses can come out on top in this department.

Speed is very important. Anything less than f 2.8 is dicey stuff as you are limiting low light performances (say in a theater, night shots etc.) Big lenses get a lovely shallow Depth of field. And for me, that is a deal breaker.

Like buddy, said, you get what you pay for. Very very true. I guess it all depends on just how much quality you really do NEED. For the pro, it is everything. For many, the pixes are great the way they are. What do ya want?

Cheers,
Take 5

B391747 Loc: Austin, TX

"Pro" covers a lot of territory. For those who shoot mainly outside, such as travel or sports photographers, rather than in a studio, a couple of other characteristics are also important: AF speed and rugged construction. When shooting unpredictable moving objects, like the wide receiver that is about to crash into you on the sideline, fast AF is critical to getting the shot. Being rugged (meaning made of more metal than plastic on the outside) is critical for a lens that's being used all day, day in and day out, getting banged around a lot in the process. So you'll find that the best pro Nikon lenses (and I'm sure Canon as well) have these things in common.

twowindsbear

I'm really curious - What Zeiss lenses are available in Canon mount?

Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip

"PRO" the kid that takes Santa photos is by defination a "PRO"= derives primary imncome taking photographs.

There are Pro's and there are Pros.

You dont need a martial arts master to learn the basics of Karate.
You dont need Richard Petty to teach you Drivers Ed.

Learn on basic gear and promote yourself as your skills claw up the learning curve.
This will give you time to save up for higher level gear and add to your competence and confidence.
When ;looking for gear take advantage of factory refurbs, get to lkmnow folks at the ;local camera shop.
I get killer deals from Pro level shooters upgrading their gear every year or two, Always pristine operating condition and very reasonably priced.
Look at the houses that sell used gear, KEH< ADORAMA< B&H< Cameta etc.
You might consider learing every function of your gear and learn it's limitations. When used with in the gears limitations you can get magnificent images.
Might consider local college extension cources and ofcourse read read read shoot shoot shoot and post what ya get

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Maybe they are boring to boring people. Sorry I just had to say that. I found they are a fun lens but I have never used mine on a shoot. Not enough time or confidence to do it. I have messed with taping aux tele and wide angle lenses. I have a set made for Polaroid that almost fits and a "lifesizer" closeup filter I have. Lots more fun than setting at a boring (again had to say it) computer doing PP. - Dave

davidv Loc: salt lake city utah

Thank you for all this info. I's so nice of all of you to take the time to answer my questions.

Take 5 Cinema Loc: Canoe BC

There are several options: Zeiss CP2 and ZF primes which are expensive and made for cinema (manual only), the newer Zeiss glass that is made strictly for the Canon mount) and Zeiss/Contax glass via an adapter ring (manual). The CP2 Primes and Canon / Zeiss optics are pretty much the same but in different housings for different purposes in the cinema world.

The ones used in the video are from Dan Lennie's (A regular director of photography) personal collection done on one of the highest resolving movie cameras of recent, teh Black Magic Camera which by the way, completely, totally anhilates the movie mode of a Canon 5DM3.

Canon glass:
L series 24mm f1.4
Canon L -Series 16-35mm f2.8 to cover focal lengths from 18mm and 35mm
Canon L Series 70-200mm f2.8 to cover focal length of 85mm
Canon EF 100mm macro f2.8

Zeiss glass:
18mm ZF.2f3.5
25mm ZF.2 f2.0
35mm ZF.2 f1.4
85mm CP.2 T2.9
100mm ZF.2 f2.0

The actual article in video is here: [url]http://vimeo.com/54146381#[[/url]

You can draw your own conclusions, but it really is a no brainer (although the 100mm's were just about the same) and fully explains why most movies are made with Zeiss glass or uber expensive equivalents.

Cheers,
Take 5