Met up with Chris (33South) yesterday, as we both picked up a 17-70mm Sigma Macro for the nice price of $450. A bargain I reckon, given the good reviews, good zoom range and Macro Capability (1:2.3). Also comes with a lens hood.
It looks and feels solid, nice construction. Already I like it more than the stock 18-55mm lens. The extra zoom range is very handy, and the separate focus ring is SO MUCH better than the 18-55, where the whole lens assembly turned during focusing.
I took it with me on the way to work this morning (left early) to get the sunrise over the Hawkesbury. The clouds participated very nicely thankyou very much, and so I have quite a few shots to go through.
Here's one chosen at random from the bunch. I'll process the rest when I get time, but so far so good!
Canon 350D + Sigma 17-70mm @ 17mm, f/22, ISO100, 1.6s exposure. No post processing except sharpen + resize for web.
and yeh, that dust mote is a stubborn one, and is extremely visible at f/22 against a sky background. I usually clone it out but couldn't be bothered this morning as it was a quick process
Glad you like the lens, I reckon its good value for money.
BTW if your cleaning the sensor that stubborn dust mote will be on the bottom right of the sensor when looking into the camera from the front. You should be able to see it with the naked eye if you get the right lighting. I usually use a small sensor brush to sweep off dust particles.
Nice shot Mike. I have the same lens, bought on Terry's recommendation, it's an amazing lens for the money. There is also a 70-300 APO lens out now which has had favourable reports.
Last edited by acropolite; 20-10-2006 at 07:03 AM.
Nice shot Mike, you would have to be happy with it. I plan on the 17-70 being my next purchase.
Went into Hardley Normal on Sunday to buy a new vacuum, and came out with a Dyson vacuum, 70-300 sigma macro, 1GB cf card and UV f/t.
I'll have to work a bit harder for the next week.
Fabulous shot Mike, it sure looks to be a great bargain. I might have to keep my eyes open for one.
@xstream Mmmmmm....Dyson.....
Are you sure you and Anna aren't related to my Mum and Dad. They went out on my Dad's 30th birthday (35 or so years ago) to get his tennis racket restrung and came home with a new tennis racket, a $400 diamond and saphire ring for Mum and a brand new Monaro GTS
Cheap as chips camera (OK it wasn't, but it sure as whatsit didn't cost as much as some of the DSLRs running around). Tee hee.
Yes, I know, they are not terribly well formatted and don't have a wonderful frame around them (turns green) but I don't have clever software to do that sort of thing.
Mmmm..that would have been nice John. Shame you bought the dyson then. If you'd bought a different vacuum cleaner you could have hidden the 400D in the dust back
just fyi not sure if you know this or not. your depth of field increases with the wider your focal length. at 17mm even at moderate apertures you will still have quite a substantial amount of depth of field.
A lot of guys make the mistake that you need to stop a lens down all the way to maximise your depth of field. Whilst I'm over simplifying a bit, and can explain a bit better in person - At 17mm you have so much DoF that you'll find something like f/8 or f/11 would be plenty.
The problems with running f/22 are ;
- diffraction
- A lens is typically at it's sharpest 2 stops from wide open and at it's worst wide open or fully stopped down.
The only times to run f/22 are ;
1) macro photography (but you are dealing with much longer focal lengths and much closer working distances)
2) If you have a subject very close to the lens, so you want to focus on it and keep your background in focus as well.
Even the lenses I use are pretty crud fully stopped down.
Picked up Sigma 17-70mm
![[1ponders]'s Avatar](../vbiis/customavatars/avatar45_9.gif){kind=avatar}
