> It's a nice lens, but it's kind of long for portraits on a
> cheap DSLR.
> I don't really have the heart to sell it right now, but I haven't
> touched it in over a year; Around half of my frames are shot with the
> 24-70L, and the rest are split between the Sigma 15-30 and
> 70-200/2.8.
> I'm happy with both Sigmas, but I'd swap the 15-30 for a Canon in a
> heartbeat, *if* they'd build something wide enough to be worth it.
Scott,
You are probably right and better off with a zoom for informal portraits
unless you take more formal protraits regularly, in which case you may
benefit from a fixed focal length of 85mm (132mm with 1.55x factor of
some DSLRs) and a F1.8 aperture. The reason being with a smaller size
image sensor has considerably more depth of field so your F2.8 is
probably closer to an F4 when used on a DSLR. An F1.8 would be about an
F2.5.
When you do move to something like a EOS1D Mark II then the 85mm becomes
a 110mm, a much better portrait length for portraits. Actually the 50mm
F1.4 would be a great portrait length on a EOS10D.
Peter K
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
