I have a small dilemma

[grafxman]

I'm currently using the excellent Sigma 18-250mm macro on my 7D for shooting photos and videos in aquariums, zoos and museums. Unfortunately many of those locations are often very dark. They are often so dark that I have to manually focus the camera. Of course this results in a poor quality noisy photo/video. After seeing the capabilities of the Canon 6D with its built in HDR, high IS0 and low noise abilities I'm just about ready to buy one. However my Sigma 18-250mm macro is not for full frame cameras which is what the 6D is. I can't seem to find an APSC camera with features similar to the 6D. So here is where my dilemma crops up. I can't find a lens with capabilities even close to the Sigma 18-250mm macro. Anyone here have any suggestions?

 

[Overread]

My advice is to head down to a camera shop (or local camera club) and try out a 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Canon or Sigma just try one and see the difference it makes over your 18-270mm. After that I'd also suggest looking at a 24-70mm f2.8 L (the original is still a very good choice if you can get one on the second hand market).

Those are two lenses that would beat your 18-250mm very significantly in performance and in low light capacity. Providing much more light for the AF sensors to work with and also a greater amount of general sharpness and corrections.

You would also want to check out a speedlite flash with an AF assist beam (Canon 430EX2 and 580EX2 both have this feature) as this will send out a red beam of light that can help you focus when in darker conditions where the normal AF sensors and lens can't provide a reliable lock.

 

[grafxman]

My advice is to head down to a camera shop (or local camera club) and try out a 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Canon or Sigma just try one and see the difference it makes over your 18-270mm. After that I'd also suggest looking at a 24-70mm f2.8 L (the original is still a very good choice if you can get one on the second hand market).

Those are two lenses that would beat your 18-250mm very significantly in performance and in low light capacity. Providing much more light for the AF sensors to work with and also a greater amount of general sharpness and corrections.

You would also want to check out a speedlite flash with an AF assist beam (Canon 430EX2 and 580EX2 both have this feature) as this will send out a red beam of light that can help you focus when in darker conditions where the normal AF sensors and lens can't provide a reliable lock.

Thanks for your prompt response Overread. Neither of the lenses you mention will come even close to the zoom range or match the capabilities of my Sigma 18-250mm macro. The Canon 70-200mm f2.8 won't focus any closer than four feet. That poses a lot of problems when photographing small animals and other things I like to photograph. The Sigma I'm currently using focuses down to just over a foot. The 24-70mm f2.8 focuses close but the zoom range is not adequate. In fact the only lens I've found so far that's even close is Canon's 24-105mm f4 lens. It focuses to about 1.5 feet however the zoom range is inadequate. BTW many of the places I shoot forbid the flash. For example, ever photo shot in this set had to be done without a flash:

Plant Museum - a set on Flickr

High ISOs, slow shutter speeds, a wide open lens and multiple attempts were the order of the day in that museum. They had NO light to speak of. They were using original Edison electric lamps and not many of them at that.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

FYI, when you see a super zoom lens, it is mostly geared toward consumers. Typically the IQ isnt that great (most consumers wont notice it) especially around the edges. They are usually not that fast and do not have a constant max aperture. That sigma you have is 13.88X zoom! On the top of that it can do "macro". All those fancy stuff make people want to buy it. Both Canon 24-70 and 70-200 are not even 3X zoom.

 

[Overread]

I think you have to make an important choice, either you stick to one single does it all lens, and there in the 18-250 mm is going to be your weapon of choice. You might have to wait for a 7DMII to see a jump in ISO performance above what you already have, but otherwise you'll be able to stick to one lens for all things.

Or you can play with the strength that DSLRs bring and use a couple of lenses. True a 70-200mm isn't going to be much use a close up photography but it will certainly do well for those longer reaching shots. You can also combine it with extension tubes and teleconverters which can give you an improved magnification in the case of teleconverters and reduced focusing distance in the case of extension tubes (although honestly for close up work I find the 70-200mm f2.8 lenses heavy for handheld and tricky to focus on the focal planes as compared to lighter closer focusing lenses).

You can also consider a proper dedicated macro lens - a light Sigma 70mm f2.8 or a larger 150mm would be ideal options to consider. You can also get Canons 100mm f2.8 IS L or original lens - any one of them will give you much closer focusing distances than the lens you have now and a much greater amount of magnification (they are all true macro lenses and thus give you 1:1 reproduction ratios - size as reflected on the sensor = size in real life - as such they will give you the same magnifications even though their focal lengths are different).

For a general purpose lens the 24-70mm f2.8 or the 25-105mm f4 (honestly these days with the high ISOs you have the f2.8 to f4 difference isn't staggering as it used to be - although dedicated low light work will still call for wider lenses) would be a great compliment to such a setup. Also the fullframe 6D will give you a wider angle of view at each focal length; so f24mm will appear to be much more like 15mm on your current camera.


I know many of those options I've suggested come with quite a big price tag attached to them and they are only a few; there are a slew of general prime and zoom lenses that you can consider. For generalist use its hard to nail down a specific setup because general means different things to different people. If you consider going down the path of lenses do sit down and write out clearly what you enjoy photographing and put on the table your very clear needs and requirements - the more specific the easier it is to find lenses that will fit those themes




ps - the first lens I had that I used for "everything" link a manic was a Sigma 70-300mm macro - since I got myself a wider variety of lenses though I've honestly not used that lens once since (save once or twice to make sure it still works). The only bonus it has is that its lighter and smaller (than some). At that point its bonuses end - AF, light gathering, image quality are all soundly beaten. If you already like your 18-250mm I think even just having a play around with other lenses will really astound you.

 

[grafxman]

Thanks for your inputs everyone. So far I'm leaning towards Canon's 24-105L IS and Sigma's 12-24mm. I already have Sigma's 50-500mm so that should give pretty decent coverage. Now I just need to decide whether to go with those lenses and the 6D or buy the lens of my dreams, a Sigmonster. Decisions, decisions.

BTW Overread, if you hit my signature you will see what I like to photograph. I'm currently running out of wildlife, zoos and aquariums to photograph, at least east of the Mississippi. However there is an unlimited supply of museums. That's why I'm getting hot for a 6D.

 

[Overread]

Wait which lens is the Sigmonster?

 

[TCampbell]

A super zoom is primarily designed for all around convenience, but there is a trade-off in image quality.

For a full-frame body (like a 6D) Canon makes a 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM (about $2500)

Tamron makes TWO DIFFERENT 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lenses... one does have have image stabilization (which Tamron calls "VC" - vibration compensation) and the other does not have image stabilization. The image stabilized version is a little over $600, the non stabilized version is a little over $400. Both have a "macro" mode (again... not true 1:1 scale macro. You'll never find a zoom that has true 1:1 scale macro -- it's usually 1:3 scale or 1:4 scale.)

The OTHER option... is to wait and see what gets announced for the new 70D. Canon's latest cameras have been coming out with higher ISO sensors that do much better job of controlling noise. The 5D III and 6D are amazing. I'm not certain that you'd be able to expect that in a 70D or 7D II (70D is rumored to be out very soon... possibly even this month, but the 7D II is not expected until perhaps the end of year, and that could slip.) Those are both APS-C crop bodies so you could continue to use the lens you already own.

 

[kathyt]

Sell the lens to help finance a new one that fits your 6D. Problem solved.

 

[grafxman]

Wait which lens is the Sigmonster?

Sigma Zoom Super Telephoto 300-800mm f/5.6 EX DG APO IF 595101

It weighs nearly 13 pounds and is almost 2 feet long. It's made by Sigma thus the Sigmonster handle. I've read perhaps 30-40 reviews and every one says its as sharp as a prime lens at all zoom settings. Of course it requires a tripod with a Wimberly gimbal head and either a lot of muscle or a cart like this:

Eckla Multi-Rolly Cart 77960 B&H Photo Video

In fact, the more I think about it, that 6D with the Canon 24-105mm and the Sigma 12-24mm is probably the sensible way to go. Every time I experience "lust" for anything I almost always regret it.

 

[grafxman]

Sell the lens to help finance a new one that fits your 6D. Problem solved.

I'm going to keep my 7D so the lenses I currently have might be used. BTW Kathy, you do realize you're responsible for my current dilemma don't you? After I saw that noise free high ISO photo you posted of the sea dragon my brain has been in a state extremely cogitation.

 

[Overread]

Ohh that lens! And yes I've heard great things about it as well! Though yeah it is a monster of a lens!

 

[grafxman]

A super zoom is primarily designed for all around convenience, but there is a trade-off in image quality.

For a full-frame body (like a 6D) Canon makes a 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM (about $2500)

Tamron makes TWO DIFFERENT 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 lenses... one does have have image stabilization (which Tamron calls "VC" - vibration compensation) and the other does not have image stabilization. The image stabilized version is a little over $600, the non stabilized version is a little over $400. Both have a "macro" mode (again... not true 1:1 scale macro. You'll never find a zoom that has true 1:1 scale macro -- it's usually 1:3 scale or 1:4 scale.)

The OTHER option... is to wait and see what gets announced for the new 70D. Canon's latest cameras have been coming out with higher ISO sensors that do much better job of controlling noise. The 5D III and 6D are amazing. I'm not certain that you'd be able to expect that in a 70D or 7D II (70D is rumored to be out very soon... possibly even this month, but the 7D II is not expected until perhaps the end of year, and that could slip.) Those are both APS-C crop bodies so you could continue to use the lens you already own.

Thanks for the info. Yes, the Canon is a little bit more than I want to spend. I've been researching the Tamron 28-300mm VC, a lens I was unaware of until your posting. As near I can tell it's a "Jekyll Hyde" lens. Most people love it to bits. However there is a significant number of people that state it's soft especially in the 250-300mm range. That's pretty much unacceptable to me. I often photograph museum exhibits and I like to include all the information about the display. That means photographing text. Here's just one of hundreds examples:

IMG_8481 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

My Sigma 18-250mm has never let me down if I do my part. In my experience the quality of a photograph, camera and lens is most noticeable when looking at something we've been looking at all our lives. Soft text is instantly recognizable unlike other things such as plants, animals, landscapes, etc. Anyway, I see BHPhoto is selling the 6D with the Canon 24-105mm L lens for a reasonable price so I'm thinking that's the way I'll probably go. It doesn't have the zoom range I'm used to and it's not macro but maybe I'll adjust to it's shortcomings. If the Canon drives me crazy with all it's shortcomings I try the Tamron. Thanks again for the info.

 

[Overread]

Remember you can always get yourself a set of Kenko Extension tubes (best value - Canon tubes are pretty much identical but WAY overpriced) and attach them between the camera and the lens. You'll lose the ability to focus on further off subjects, but you'll reduce the minimum focusing distance; a very neat and cheap way to give you a quick macro feature - ideal for when you want to get in closer for some detail shots.

 

[Tiller]

I thought you wanted to shoot in museums? Are you going to be carrying that beast in a museum? Get the 6d and a few fast primes, and a macro lens if that's what you want to shoot.