OonlyBonly

:thumbup:

amehta Loc: Boston

First, the third-party lenses: they less consistent than the Canon L-series or Nikon pro/prosumer lenses, but there are definite winners in the mix. When you can identify the lenses which are competitive with the Canon/Nikon offerings, you can save some money (although now the prices are sometimes comparable too). One example is the 70-200mm f/2.8 offerings with stabilization. The Canon/Nikon lenses are about $2200-2400, depending on rebates. The Tamron is $1500 and the Sigma is $1250. Optically, the Tamron/Sigma are competitive, some say even better, others say close but not quite as good. I think the price difference comes from three things: optical quality (maybe), build quality (usually), and brand name.

There is, unfortunately, a fourth factor: compatibility. While the third-party lenses will work with current cameras, they may have issues with future cameras. Sigma recently had a press release that their older lenses may have an issue with some of the newest Nikon cameras, because the way the camera and lens communicate seems to have changed. I'm not sure exactly what is going on, and whether Nikon did something to make things difficult for third-party lenses, or if they did something to make things work better in general, and this was a side-effect. Since this seems to be an issue of "forward compatibility", I can see the latter being true. I have two Tokina lenses from the 1990s, and they do not work with the D200 or D700, but they do seem to work with my D800. Meanwhile, the Nikon lenses I got in the 1990s worked with all the DSLRs. All of these kinds of issues also apply with Canon DSLRs.

Back to your "short zoom with IS" goal. I think the 24-105mm lens is an excellent range. The 24-70mm is slightly limiting, and really needs to be paired with a 70-200mm. The 24-70mm should be better optically than the 24-105mm, because it's a smaller zoom range (3x vs 4.5x), but that difference isn't significant for very many people. Meanwhile, the added 70-105mm range really enhances the portrait options and gives a little more "reach" for other uses before another lens is needed. You could even pair that with a Tamron 150-600mm and have a great range, never missing the 105-150mm gap.

If you decide on the 24-105mm, the question of the Canon or the Sigma is a bit of a challenge, and the most useful thing would be if you could put each on your camera and shoot for at least a few minutes. If the testing is correct and the Sigma is a little better optically (DxOMark scores it at 24 vs 20 for the Canon), and you are comfortable with the build quality, then you are also saving $200. If I start shooting more events, and need a zoom, I would give this a serious look myself.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Nice images! I've noticed here in uhh that the 90mm Tamron is often a highly recommended lens. Apparently the 80-210 not so much.

amehta Loc: Boston

True, I sometimes forget the "just play" factor.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Now that I've cleaned my system of my weekly quota of cheap shots, let me just say that I have done a lot of experimenting with legacy lens on my current cameras and while the lens will often yield some very nice images, I can't use them much with the way I choose to shoot today. When you have time to manually focus such as in macro where it is actually better in most cases, the results is better than if I'm trying to shoot a football game or some fast moving wildlife. I have old Nikon, Pentax, Tamron, Sigma, Tokina, Kiron, Vivitar Series 1 and other lens as well as some old Canon FL and FD lens.

Canon FL/FD on EOS gives the worst of all worlds unless using the Ed Mika glass-less adapter that allows focus to infinity. Anything I've found with a glass/plastic piece in the adapter takes the sharpest FD lens out of contention with modern "L" lens. One FD lens I have is the extremely sharp FD 135mm f/2 which suffers noticeably adapted to my 5D2 with anything but the Ed Mika adapter. It makes it not worth having or using.

Bram boy Loc: Vancouver Island B.C. Canada

for one that wasent built for that camera . it may seem to fit but if it's one hairs breath away from fitting perfect . you may be in for problems , unless it's made for your camera . they make them the way they do so people will screw up there camera if they use the wrong len's , you may motor along
for a bit , then all of a sudden you have a $700 repair bill . I have seen it happen . and I hear about it happening lots .

chrisewers Loc: born UK. live in USA.

STEADY THERE BOY NOT VERY SUBJECTIVE!

:lol:

chrisewers Loc: born UK. live in USA.

You can get lenses to fit, there are adapters for nearly everything, but there are issues - mirror contact - not so good glass and more importantly most adapters wont allow the lens to focus to infinity. This may not bother you but eventually it will. Also the cameras have really brilliant features which you cant use with these lenses as they will require full manual, the camera cant focus them, and cant generally issue focus acceptance. I would just look for used glass from a reputable camera store (EBAY stuff is often very bad -risky).

NYjoe Loc: US/UK

ok folks...I have gone right off the idea of adapting my old tamron to my new camera. It was nice to hear from you all on my oddball question and I won't promise there won't be others...it seems I am not the only wonderer with whacky ideas in this forum and that suits me just fine. Thanks to all.

amehta Loc: Boston

Keep the wacky ideas coming, some end up being brilliant! :-)

chrisewers Loc: born UK. live in USA.

You just never know.

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

Brilliant :thumbup:

One Camera One Lens Loc: Traveling

NYJoe, I have to agree with SwampGator, you just DON'T put a junk lense on a $3,400 camera, or even think about it. Take it from a Pro, and you'll be ok.............good luck

compfly

I certainly hope so since I have the same lens and want to buy a new Canon DSLR. I have a lens adapter that I used on my Canon film camera.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

So you're saying that third party manufacturers intentionally mess with their tolerances to screw up a different brand camera? Totally absurd. :thumbdown: