06-08-2017, 10:16 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-08-2017, 10:17 AM by Rover.)
I would not care about that any... for example, what relevance does the equivalence to FF - a format I've never been using and likely will not be using in any foreseeable future - have for me? Not any more than MF or LF for that matter. Of course, everyone's case is different...
I tend to refer to my lenses not by any FL or much less their equivalence to anything, but as "DA WIDE", "DA LONG", "DA WIDE FOR DARKNESS" and "DA ULTRAWIDE".  There's also "DA LENZ TO PUT IN DA BAG JUST IN CASE", which is the 24-85. Soon maybe to be joined by "DA CURVED".
06-08-2017, 10:24 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-08-2017, 10:51 AM by Brightcolours.)
Quote:I would not care about that any... for example, what relevance does the equivalence to FF - a format I've never been using and likely will not be using in any foreseeable future - have for me? Not any more than MF or LF for that matter. Of course, everyone's case is different...
I tend to refer to my lenses not by any FL or much less their equivalence to anything, but as "DA WIDE", "DA LONG", "DA WIDE FOR DARKNESS" and "DA ULTRAWIDE". There's also "DA LENZ TO PUT IN DA BAG JUST IN CASE", which is the 24-85. Soon maybe to be joined by "DA CURVED".
Still, for you it is handy to know that iPhone 6S' back camera lens is equivalent to "DA WIDE", but not so much to "DA WIDE FOR DARKNESS".
Or, that when you read, out of whatever interest, about for instance a Fuji GXF, that "23mm" means more or less a lens between "DA WIDE" and "DA ULTRAWIDE" (18mm FF equivalent).
So, still equivalence, but you pick a different reference point.
Equivalence is not about FF, but how does X compare to Y. You can pick X and Y freely. To make things easier, usually people pick FF 135 format as Y.
Ok ok ok
Equivalent or not equivalent that's not the issue.
In my shoes would you get Sigma/tamron 70-200f2.8 IS and use it on 5D or this one on 750D ?
Will tell you next week ;-)
Quote:Ok ok ok
Equivalent or not equivalent that's not the issue.
In my shoes would you get Sigma/tamron 70-200f2.8 IS and use it on 5D or this one on 750D ?
Why not the 70-200 on the 750D? My 70-200 performed admirably on whichever APS-C and APS-H bodies I attached it to, and it has been a lot of different cameras - at least seven that I can remember.
Quote:Why not the 70-200 on the 750D? My 70-200 performed admirably on whichever APS-C and APS-H bodies I attached it to, and it has been a lot of different cameras - at least seven that I can remember.
The only valid reason would be, to go for most shallow DOF ability on the 750D.
Thread Title: Shouldn't it be "DC" if it is a crop lens? I had high hopes for a sec..
Correct, the Sigma description is 50-100mm F1.8 DC HSM
Art is not used in the description. Impressive, already 14 Art lenses since the first came out 5 years ago...
06-09-2017, 09:39 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-09-2017, 09:39 AM by Klaus.)
There's an A on the barrel, also correct, but this A is not part of the lens' name which is
- in a different font
- in a different color
- on a different place
- in a different orientation
on the barrel. At the moment, there's only one type available as Sports or Contemporary type: The 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM needs the S or C to be fully specified. Consequently used, you're right. With "Description I was referring to the dropdown list of lenses, which contains "Art", "Contemporary" or "Sports" only at the first lens in the row.
|
