07-17-2010, 01:23 PM
Thanks for your thoughts both,
I already have the 50-500 by Sigma and I really don't like it compared to results that I see from the Canon 100-400.
Even when stopping down to F11 I still don't get the same sharpness and contrast.
I also have the Sigma 105mm
It perform well but tend to break a lot... now I have to deal with the aperture blades which stopped function
and are stock some where around F7.1 (assuming).
This is another reason why I want to replace my lenses to an all Canon.
Why is the Sigma 8-16 is preferred on the Canon 10-22 ?
The wide side ?
And last but not least,
I'm thinking about the 180mm Macro as I love to photograph insects
probably my ring flash won't be anymore of tool here because of the length from the object
but I'm taking it in consideration.
I already have the 50-500 by Sigma and I really don't like it compared to results that I see from the Canon 100-400.
Even when stopping down to F11 I still don't get the same sharpness and contrast.
I also have the Sigma 105mm
It perform well but tend to break a lot... now I have to deal with the aperture blades which stopped function
and are stock some where around F7.1 (assuming).
This is another reason why I want to replace my lenses to an all Canon.
Why is the Sigma 8-16 is preferred on the Canon 10-22 ?
The wide side ?
And last but not least,
I'm thinking about the 180mm Macro as I love to photograph insects
probably my ring flash won't be anymore of tool here because of the length from the object
but I'm taking it in consideration.