WOW Sigma 50-100 f1.8 aps-c

C

carguy

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
If it's sufficiently sharp, and I mean corner to corner and across the entire focal length, I see it being a worthy replacement for a couple fast primes such as the 50mm & 85mm as well as serving as a 70-200mm equivalent on a DX body. I can see that being pretty appealing to someone who wants to get as much flexibility as possible out of as few lenses as possible or with as little lens swapping as possible. I'm not all THAT averse to lens swapping but I know some people are.

Reviewing the specs, I see she's gonna be a big girl; taking 82mm filters and weighing in at just over three-and-a-quarter pounds! Let that sink in for a moment... The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 seems almost svelte in comparison, using 77mm filters and weighing in at just over two-and-half pounds. My Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 takes an 82mm filter but weighs a "feathery" pound-and-three-quarters.
Click to expand...

hark said:
Hmm...without OS/VR, that's a lot to hold steady by hand.
Click to expand...

I concur. Considering the size/weight and lack of OS/VR, that's a big deal.
Then again, think about how much it would be with OS/VR.....
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
carguy said:
I concur. Considering the size/weight and lack of OS/VR, that's a big deal.
Then again, think about how much it would be with OS/VR.....
Click to expand...
It's a heavy lens but I actually find heavier lenses easier to hold steady than I do light ones, since the extra weight works like a damper. OS/VR in my mind is a nice thing to have, but I don't consider it a "must have". But again, that's me. I fully appreciate many people want/need OS/VR much more than I do and I guess I'm looking at this lens as being relegated pretty much to portraiture where I simply don't use OS/VR.
 
B

Blacktop

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
It's a heavy lens but I actually find heavier lenses easier to hold steady than I do light ones, since the extra weight works like a damper. OS/VR in my mind is a nice thing to have, but I don't consider it a "must have". But again, that's me. I fully appreciate many people want/need OS/VR much more than I do and I guess I'm looking at this lens as being relegated pretty much to portraiture where I simply don't use OS/VR.
Click to expand...
I do as well.
 
BackdoorArts

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
Selling your IR/D800?! I know you're just tossing ideas around and I don't know if I'm the guy to talk you off that ledge or not but... That seems like a LOT to give up.
Click to expand...

I'd only give it up if I held onto the D7000. One of them should go. The D7000 actually meters far more consistently than the D800 for IR. A lot of IR shooters actually seem to prefer cropped sensor cameras as well. I barely ever shoot over ISO 400 with IR, so noise isn't an issue. I'd really need to do side by sides for a true comparison, which requires me waiting a couple months for foliage. I may stick the D7000 out there for a month and see if I get my asking price. The D800 still shoots at 16MP's with a DX lens, so the truth is I wouldn't be losing anything.
 
Top