topic Re: My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8? in General Discussion

My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8?

Owenmorris — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 06:08:12 GMT

Hello,

I've been using my Canon 17-55 2.8 lens very happily for a few months now on my 60D.

But I have had my head turned by all the reviews of the new Sigma 18-35 1.8.

I've been looking through all my photos and I am very much mostly using the 17-55 in the 17-35 focal range. It is extremely rare that I take any photos on a longer focal range.

Would I....should I .....be seriously thinking of changing my 17-55 for this new Sigma 18-35.

I was thinking that if I did, I could maybe add the Canon prime 50mm 1.4 or the Canon 60mm 2.8

Please, if anyone out there has advice they could give me that would be very much appreciated.

Re: My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8?

ScottyP — Sun, 25 Aug 2013 12:10:49 GMT

How much of that time are you shooting at 2.8 and wishing you had a narrower DOF?

Re: My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8?

Owenmorris — Sun, 01 Sep 2013 16:27:43 GMT

Re if I'm shooting a lot at 2.8 with my 17-55 and wanting narrower DOF....then, actually yes.

90% of my photos are indoor portraits......boudoir type pics.....

I DO like the focusing quickness and overall sharpness of the 17-55.........but I think I'm missing something.

So my immediate options are.......: sell the 17-55 and get the Sigma 18-35. I am very interested in this lens on my 60D.

Or:......wait a little while and get a 6D....probably with the kit 24-105.....though I'm not convinced how much better overall this will be than my 60D with the 17-55.

But if i get the 6D.....at least then it will lead me into FF and the lens possibiliies therefore.

I'm still thinking of the Sigma 18-35 though.......with a canon 50mm 1.4

Any thoughts?

Re: My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8?

ScottyP — Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:17:50 GMT

Here is a depth of field calculator. At 35mm you get a much deeper DOF than with a more telephoto lens.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm

At a distance of 10 feet at 35mm, using f/1.8 aperture, your depth of field in focus would be 1.78 feet. Is that enough for what you do? If you shoot the same shot at f/2.8 with your 17-55 you get a depth of 2.81 feet that is in focus.

I have never shot boudoir, but I believe you need to get full head-to-toe framing in some of the shots? Maybe 35mm is good for that then, as compared to a longer "portrait" length, like 50mm (80mm equivalent on your crop). I do think you'd need to pick up a 50mm or 60mm for the tighter head-and-shoulders shots if you dump the 17-55. You'd get ugly big noses and foreheads shooting that close with a 35mm lens.

But of course that 18-35 is wasted glass if you do go full frame. That is a big variable. But then your 17-55 would also be useless on ff, so are you really hurting anything by switching? Hmmmm.

Re: My Canon 17-55 or new Sigma 18-35 1.8?

AzSTMPR — Thu, 15 May 2014 14:15:52 GMT

I am in the semi- same boat as you. I have a 60D but I have the EF-S 18-55 3.5-5.6 lens. I've been reading reviews and watching videos of the EF-S 17-55 IS USM and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and I just pulled the trigger on getting the Sigma. It hasnt come in yet but I think that it will be awesome! I also have a 50 1.8 MK1 and 55-250 3.5-5.6 II so I kind of know how it feels to shoot at 1.8 and I gotta say its amazing. I'm not a fan of flash so the 1.8 is really great. If youre planning on going FF then I guess you wouldnt need the Sigma as it'll just be money wasted. If you stick to the 60D then maybe going Sigma might be a good move. Good Luck!