need quick opinion on


Status
Not open for further replies.

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#2
Just my opinion, I think the 17-70mm that Feng Wei was offering would have been a better (range) lens in a APS-C DSLR. Unless you are using a Film or full frame, get that one instead..
 

slacker

New Member
Mar 18, 2003
618
0
0
SG
Visit site
#4
Just curious how much difference is the two?
To be frank, i love the 17-70 since i got it and it cover the wide for most situation with a nice 2.8 though the sweet spot is at F4.
In long run, i do think it is more worthy to get the 17-70 to suppress the LBA for a longer time than 28-70. :p
 

hjbyeo

Senior Member
May 5, 2006
5,165
30
48
East
#5
Actually, most at wide angles, I don't use 2.8 if possible. If there's good lighting conditions, I would go 5.6 and above.. not sure if that's what usually pple do.
 

slacker

New Member
Mar 18, 2003
618
0
0
SG
Visit site
#6
Ya. I do use above 4 most of the time for group shots.
2.8/17mm at times when i want space around my subject and small aperture to bring the focus of the picture to the subject while keeping everything else as dreamy as possible.
 

NoMoney

New Member
Mar 20, 2007
1,199
0
0
Ang Mo Kio
#7
Sigma 28-70mm DG F2.8-4
thanks!
Erenon- Sorry to crash your thread

Just got a qns to ask about this lens.

Seems like its a fisheye lens?

As per Sigma website:
"This digitally optimized diagonal fisheye lens is equipped with a new multi-layer coating technology that reduces both flare and ghosting."

Is there any differences between the fixed focal length fisheye lens and this 28-70?
 

fusetrips

New Member
Jan 17, 2002
345
0
0
#8
I would prefer that lens as well, but the price difference is pretty big
Although Sigma 17-70 is a good lens but not every copy has the same IQ. I had mine replaced due to back focus.
 

Apr 5, 2007
533
0
0
West of Singapore
#9
Seems like its a fisheye lens?

As per Sigma website:
"This digitally optimized diagonal fisheye lens is equipped with a new multi-layer coating technology that reduces both flare and ghosting."

Is there any differences between the fixed focal length fisheye lens and this 28-70?
A fisheye zoom that goes up to 70mm? :bigeyes: not sure if that's technically possible, cos the 2 fisheye zooms by pentax had rather short maximum focal lengths (DA 10 - 17, F 17 - 28). However, I've tried the 17 - 70 on a film body before, and the barrel distortion was visible even at 70mm, which sorta gives a fisheye effect. This would be minimised with the APS - C sized sensor tho.
 

NoMoney

New Member
Mar 20, 2007
1,199
0
0
Ang Mo Kio
#11
A fisheye zoom that goes up to 70mm? :bigeyes: not sure if that's technically possible, cos the 2 fisheye zooms by pentax had rather short maximum focal lengths (DA 10 - 17, F 17 - 28). However, I've tried the 17 - 70 on a film body before, and the barrel distortion was visible even at 70mm, which sorta gives a fisheye effect. This would be minimised with the APS - C sized sensor tho.
I was surprise too. :)

I used to consider this lens few months back but gave up as it seems to be a fisheye lens. :)
 

alanswan

New Member
Aug 23, 2005
963
0
0
Seng Kang
#12
It's funny though...
I have the 17-70 but never considered it fisheye....
In fact, I'm using as my kit replacement.
There's slight distortion at 17 though... but not as pronounced as the DA10-17.
I'm considering the Sigma 10-20 now though...
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#13
Sigma 28-70mm DG F2.8-4
thanks!
This is a cheap consumer level lens, but optically it's pretty good. Should work well as a daily walkabout lens. Of course it's not wide enough on dSLR for traveling or stuff like that, but should be okay for street or people photos. You probably need to keep your kit lens (if you have one) when you need to go wide.

Sigma has a better faster one: 28-70/2.8 EX DG, which should be alot better. But of course it's much more expensive, and much heavier too.

For one lens solution, of course the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 seems to be a better buy. Although it's more expensive, but you probably can live w/ one lens instead of two :)

Good luck.
 

#14
thanks fengwei. I thought yours was pretty well priced, but its really hard to justify now. Had i received tour answer earlier i might have bid for that lens. oh well.
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#15
Go with one that fits ur budget best;)

Before Sigma 17-70mm, ppl went for DA 16-45mm. Then dump it for Sigma 17-70mm, and now going for the f2.8s. Never ending one. Soon u'll discovered u're in LBA:bsmilie: LBA very hard to cure, only way to cure it is to isolate urself from the photography world and concentrate on discovering ur own photography;)
 

fengwei

Moderator
Staff member
Aug 25, 2004
14,462
12
0
Queenstown
www.pbase.com
#16
Go with one that fits ur budget best;)

Before Sigma 17-70mm, ppl went for DA 16-45mm. Then dump it for Sigma 17-70mm, and now going for the f2.8s. Never ending one. Soon u'll discovered u're in LBA:bsmilie: LBA very hard to cure, only way to cure it is to isolate urself from the photography world and concentrate on discovering ur own photography;)
That's totally true.

Got stuck in the photogear world all this time, can't seem to get out :cry: I probably should dump most of my gear, just keep one or two lenses so I can use them well, instead of holding most of them in hand but not using them at all ...
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#17
That's totally true.

Got stuck in the photogear world all this time, can't seem to get out :cry: I probably should dump most of my gear, just keep one or two lenses so I can use them well, instead of holding most of them in hand but not using them at all ...
:bsmilie: Took me abt 6 months away from CS to learn. I never thought I'll go into Petography and product photography. Think it's due to being stuck at home and looking after a puppy:bsmilie:
 

slacker

New Member
Mar 18, 2003
618
0
0
SG
Visit site
#18
:bsmilie: Took me abt 6 months away from CS to learn. I never thought I'll go into Petography and product photography. Think it's due to being stuck at home and looking after a puppy:bsmilie:
Guess it is a nice surprise to see you back here as well...
For a long while, thought u got lost in the forest while trying to find bug to shoot... :p
 

longko

Senior Member
Sep 7, 2006
2,052
1
0
39
Balestier
#20
I've got a baby... not a puppy. Most photos i take these days are of her
The puppy thingy wasn't directed at you. Anyway, if u aren't going to take wides and has a budget, Sigma 28-70mm is a good option. The advise given was;

Go with one that fits ur budget best;)

Before Sigma 17-70mm, ppl went for DA 16-45mm. Then dump it for Sigma 17-70mm, and now going for the f2.8s. Never ending one. Soon u'll discovered u're in LBA:bsmilie: LBA very hard to cure, only way to cure it is to isolate urself from the photography world and concentrate on discovering ur own photography;)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom