C100: Canon 17-55 f2.8 vs Sigma 18-35 f1.8

J

John Y

Member
I'm trying to decide which of these to drop some hard earned cash on. I know many people love the 17-55, especially since it has IS but the Sigma is very tempting at f1.8. I would be grateful for your advice, especially from those who have both lenses.
 
I haven't used the sigma, but I have the 17-55 and find it only okay. IQ is good but doesn't have enough range to make it a viable mid range zoom. At best it is a wide zoom IMO. It also has some weird build decisions like the reversed focus/zoom that for video really gets in the way. Great stills lens though.

i think the Sigma looks great and the 1.8 is a huge advantage. I would trade off the extra range for the speed and keep a 24-105 in the bag.
 
I have the 17-55mm 2.8 IS lens and it is a very good wide zoom. The lens is great for handheld doc type shooting because of the range and the IS. The 17-55 translates to about 25-82 FOV which gives you a good working range when matched with a 70-200mm lens in your kit. I have not used the Sigma but it looks like a really great lens, very fast. It does have a 35mm-equivalent focal length range of 28.8-56mm which is more limited than the 17-55.

It really depends on what lenses you already own and your needs. 2.8 vs 1.8 is not a huge advantage with a C100. This really all depends on the kind of shooting you mostly do and what you need the lens to accomplish. The 17-55 is a better doc lens IMO and the Sigma may be a better narrative type lens.
 
Here's what I have now:

Tokina 11-16 f2.8
Canon 24-70 f2.8 L
Canon 24-105 f4.0 L IS

I primarily shoot run & gun doc style projects with some narrative. I would love to use primes with wider apertures but don't have the time to keep changing lenses. That's why I'm considering the Sigma f1.8. Should I consider any other lenses?
 
Hi Erik…I'm thinking I could use one lens between 17-50 I can use for most situations I tend to encounter during running & gunning. I'm trying to avoid having to swap between the 11-16 & 24-70. The Sigma is real tempting being an f1.8 and all the rave reviews I've been reading. I'm thinking I'll also need a 70-200 at some point.
 
John Y said:
Hi Erik…I'm thinking I could use one lens between 17-50 I can use for most situations I tend to encounter during running & gunning. I'm trying to avoid having to swap between the 11-16 & 24-70. The Sigma is real tempting being an f1.8 and all the rave reviews I've been reading. I'm thinking I'll also need a 70-200 at some point.
Click to expand...

The 24-105 is your best friend for handheld with IS. Run and gun at 1.8 might be difficult at 35mm to keep focus sharp. I like the Sigma a lot but I don't R&G. If I do have to get a lot of shots in a short time the 24-105 is my favorite. Tough choice. Might want to rent them. If IS is important then the Canon is the choice. Speed goes to Sigma.

I went with Sigma 18-35 because I needed a fast 50mm and the 18-35 at 35mm wide open looks great.

I would love a 24-70 2.8 IS. I'm hoping Sigma will make one in the ART line.
 
I'd like to weigh in on the 18-135 for run and gun. Slow, but so what with the C100. Some barrel distortion wide, but usually not a problem. The width of 18mm vs our 24-105 is worth a lot in tight quarters, and I often wish I had a little more than 135 on the long end. We also have the 10-20mm sigma f3.5, and the 70-200 f4 is. The autofocus push button works surprisingly well on the 18-135 as well (-slowly shakes head in wonder that he's advocating auto-focus on a cinema camera...).
 
Cosimo I have to agree. The 18 - 135 is a great range for run n gun. And when your running after people hand held you dont want to be wider than f5.6 as focus is hard to nail.
 
I have a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, I like that leans very much! The IS is VERY important for you if you are going to shoot footage from your hands, The 17-55mm range is amazing on a C100 crop sensor. You can watch that short documentary that was shot handheld with C100 + Log and Canon 17-55mm IS.
 
I have the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC lens which is similar to the Canon but cheaper... I like it a lot and it works well with the C100.
 
Thanks everyone for your feedback. I've decided on the 17-55 as it looks like the best fit for the majority of my shooting, R & G doc style. IS will be important to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top