DSLR

[Martin Naef]

Hi Joost

Joost Schuttelaar wrote:
>> - Distortion on the wide angle side: This is very annoying when taking
>> architectural shots. My 12-24mm has almost none - and it's even wider.
> 
> Which 12-24 is that? I've got the 12-24 DX from Nikon which is very  

I'm using the Sigma 12-24mm. It's not exactly fast, but *extremely* low 
distortion. As a nice extra, it also works on a full frame camera - on 
Gert's 5D, it was seriously cool. At that time, there wasn't anything 
else available, so I bit the bullet and spent the money. No regrets...

> I don't see the problems in my shots when I use my 18-200 :) Together  

Have you ever made any direct comparisons against a good lens? Tried to 
shoot architecture?

I've briefly tried the Canon 17-85mm when I bought the 40D (I was 
considering the kit). I didn't read any tests on that one before, so I 
came quite neutral to it. Even in the shop the distortion on the wide 
end struck me as disturbing - that lens is actually a hint better than 
the Nikon 18-200.

To be honest, I only really started appreciating a sharp lens when I got 
my 50mm prime...

> with the 12-24 they make a very nice package. Snug in my backpack. I  
> find the shots more than sharp enough and I hardly see any  
> distortion... the VR is great when shooting a bit far away.

Stabilisation is nice for anything that doesn't move. I'm quite happy 
that I have it in my 28-135, although I'd still lean towards a faster 
lens instead (or both...).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to bash a perfectly ok lens. I just 
find that you can get better value for money if you're prepared to 
change lenses once in a while...

Bye
Martin

-- 
http://www.navisto.ch
http://www.myspace.com/navisto