I'm looking for a lens that's a wide angle and I found a Tamron that's fairly cheap in price. It's the Tamron AF 19-35mm F/3.5-4.5. Anyone familiar with this lens and can shed some light on it?

Are you shooting crop body or full frame?

I dunno what that means lol. I'm fairly new to photography

im thinking of getting a wide angle lens and been looking at the tokina 11-16 f2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX

any input on this lens?

^^^ One of the best wide angle lenses out there.

whats the cheapest price you've seen it at...
right now broadway camera sells for $759.99 =[
i saw it before at $6xx
guess i'll wait for the sale

yes im cheap cuz im a student

Haven't normally seen lenses such as these on sale. You might be able to find a few used. I sold mine recently used. It's a great, great wide angle lens and compares very well with the Canon 10-22.

Yes, you've probably seen it in the $6xx range, but the price went up a lot earlier this year. Now they're in the high $700 range. The Tokina is still in demand, so I doubt you'll see it on sale anytime soon.

I'm sure it's sharper than the Canon 10-22 and with less wavy distortion.

awesome awesome fast lens.
I got it for $600, relative brought it over from Taiwan.
Ronin got it for less when he bought it in Japan.

great for walkaround/wide....and you wont think that you're missing out on both ends,
compared to the canon 10-22,
10 to 11mm, you can just take a teeny step back.
same for 16 to 22mm, step forward a little.

if you can find it for cheaper than 700, take it! good luck though, the price of it went UP because demand is so high.....

though its not my best stuff, you can see samples of it in my flickr stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kwu/tags/tokina1116mmf28/
is everything tagged with it.

Anyone know a thing or two about the Sigma Super Wide II 24mm 2.8 lens? Looks decent to me.

It's a Sigma, so caveat emptor.

Word, I have 2 Sigma lenses and they're pretty decent. However, today I just borrowed a Sigma 24-60 F2.8 and it was just garbage. I think it either front or back focuses as the focus was never bang on when checking at full res.

What's the big problem with Sigma? I have seen some great photos taken with Sigma lenses, but then I hear about all sorts of other problems.

Is it a fault with trying to be a "one size fits all" type of company that results in poor quality manufacturing/assembly?

Sigma has very bad quality control & service. Sigma has up to a 20% return/exchange rate due to softness, back focusing or front focusing. One lens would be super sharp, but the one sitting next to it on the shelf would be soft or have focusing issues. They also have a high failure rate compared to the lenses from the major manufacturers...again up to 20%, compared to Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax which seem hover around 6%.

Sigma service also is pretty bad. It can take up to 4 months to get lenses back from repair. Canon & Nikon can have a faulty lens back to you in a matter of a few weeks, even faster if you have a CPS or NPS number.

Makes one wonder how they are able to stay in business producing something that is used by people who have high expectations of quality. It's not like they're making $20 clock radios.

The casual user doesn't know what a high quality lens is capable of. Of course, budget constraints play a role, and Sigma does have some unusual focal lengths, but most amateurs have never experienced the sharpness or high contrast of a high end lens.

Speaking of quality lenses... got to play with an EF-400mm f/2.8L IS USM today. Damn, that's some sexy glass. Freakin' heavy too. Buddy got it used for $5K(!!!!). *drool*

i agree and disagree.


35mm f2 is a must have if u can find one (works out to a proper 50mm FOV on 1.6) . 85mm 1.8 is also a must have (LOVE mine, think 135 on 1.6)

a 50mm on a 1.6x is basically a poor mans 85. my gf LOVES using my 85 1.8 on her 5D, so i in turn will steal her 50 1.2 for my 40D to get similar results (in FOV anyway!)

personally, i find 50mm more boring on FF than 1.6! YMMV!

gotta agree with that, i love the 10-20 wideangle, but i can understand, for someone more professional, they would hate this lens. its af, and thus 1/2 the time it is hard to get it to focus right.

after playing with it for a good year now, i must say i almost never use it at its fullest wide angle. the picture is just too distorted.

Now you know why I love that lens. :D I do think the 500mm f4 is a better compromise though...less weight, less expensive, longer reach, but the buttery smooth bokeh (if it's anything like the Nikon 400mm) at f2.8 is awesome.

Your buddy got a good deal on it.

It's not brand new, but there is someone selling a relatively new condition copy of the Tokina you are looking for here: http://www.bccamera.com/forum/viewto...e7a6b836346df9

Snapped a few of Rick Tippe with it... VERY impressed with how crisp and clear it is compared to my ooooooooold 75-300. Small version:
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_8W57ombPl6k/Sm...0/IMG_2363.JPG

100% crop here: http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo...eat=directlink

hey, i'm thinking of getting a tele zoom lens to add to my collection. Right now, i have a 40D (which i JUST upgraded to from a 1000D) with a Sigma 10-20, and 18-50 f2.8.

thinking of one of the following. they're relatively close in price here in the UK.

Sigma 50-150 f2.8
Canon 70-300 f4-5.6 IS
Canon 70-200 f4

the sigma, i've been trying to find some good reviews on it, but can't really. It would compliment my current collection well, because with the other 2, i would lose out between 50-70, which isn't that big a deal. but it's also the fastest lens, but it might not be the sharpest.

i've heard amazing things about the 70-200 f4, but the IS i would get with the 70-300 would help a lot. plus, i don't know if i'm ready for an L lens quite yet....

any thoughts?

edit: i think the 50-150 sigma works with their teleconvertor, but i heard it looks like crap... anyone seen it before?

^I just picked up the 70-200 F4 L and i can't believe what a difference L-glass makes! the image looks amazing...sharpness is great, and the colors are so vivid it just pops out at you.

i now know what i've been missing. :)

get one, you won't be disappointed dood.

Just a question to all the Nikon users, for those of you who have the 50mm lens, which F do you have? and does it make a difference at all selecting either one?