try rokinon

Buy full frame lenses then

>>2834868
>what the fuck are the best lenses for my Canon 80D
For what?

>every good lens is for full frame
So? It'll still work on your camera.

>barely better than my 18-135 USM Kit lens.
Oh you're trolling. You should put stuff like that first so I don't waste my time.

I think I'm getting baited, but

>barely better than my 18-135 USM Kit lens.
>barely
It's more or less on a whole other league of better. Your camera right now is about on par with a super compact like an RX100.
With the 18-35 1.8 you're getting 90% of the way towards full frame pro cameras.

You probably should sell your 80d and buy an RX100 until you're good enough to handle cameras with interchangeable lenses.

a good full kit "on the cheap-ish" side of things would be

>Canon 10-18
>Sigma 18-35 1.8
>Sigma's 50 1.4 or 85 1.4 or 105 2.8 OS macro, or Canon's 70-200 f/4 depending on personal needs

>>2834868
For telephoto lenses it doesn't really matter that they are full frame.
The larger image circle hardly increases the price, and the center sharpness is generally excellent.

For the mid range you have that excellent Sigma.

The only problematic category is ultra wide.
And even there you have at least some reasonable options.

>>2834881

Wasn't bait i'm just a massive noob

thanks for your post, helped me out.

Gunna save for the SIgma 18-35 first and take it from there.

Any tips on using my 18-135 for the time being? Seeing as you're being generous with the advice already.

>>2835971
The 18-135mm is a superzoom or travel zoom lens. It is soft on both ends with loads of distortions and chromatic aberrations, but better than the longer 18-200 or 18-300 superzooms.
It is okay if you go on a holiday and only want to bring one lens so keep it for now.
The cheap list the other anon provided is very good but not really budget friendly. If you have a tight budget here's some other options for you.
I'd recommend you getting a good budget telezoom like the EF-S 55-250 or Tamron 70-300 VC and on the wide end either get the supercheapo 18-55 kit lens or save up a bit and get the Tamron 17-50/2.8. I'd also recommend getting the nifty fifty 50/1.8 and the EF-S 24mm pancake (maybe the EF 40mm pancake too)

>>2835971
I can give a tip, though I'm not that person.
With wide zoom range lenses, it can be tempting to focus too much on framing and just zoom in and out until whatever object fits, rather than moving with your feet and selecting a focal length that will perform well.

This can give quite bad results sometimes because the wide zooms often have extra distortion at the ends (do test shots of straight lines at the 18mm on that zoom, the 50mm and the 135mm)
These distortions are a compromise for moving around different shapes of glass.
A prime lens made specifically for 20mm could lack that barrel distortion and look different than the zoom lens set to 20mm.
You can use software profiles to fix these types of distortion but only if you're aware of it.

You might think that because you can go all the way to 18mm you can stay right close to the subject instead of backing up.
But distance to the subject determines the relative distance to each part of the subject. Suddenly a models nose and chin are so much closer to you than their ears or cheeks.
These ratios can only be changed by changing your position or the target's position, not by fidgeting with your 18-135mm zoom ring.
So it's good to think of it as several different lenses and change your position to be appropriate to each lens type, rather than thinking of it as one magic lens that lets you stand wherever you want.
Not important if you just want snapshits, but important if you take things seriously.

>>2835971
me from
>>2836055
wanted to add, I have the sigma 18-35 F1.8 art, it's in my top 3 favorite lenses on my crop body.
I'm not a realtor who needs extreme super wide close range shots so I never need lower than the 18mm, and for the whole range it is sharp as the 3-4 prime lenses it can replace.

Unfortunately it weighs as much as 3-4 tiny prime lenses in order to maintain that F1.8 at a decent zoom range.
The affordability and convenience win definitely goes to my nifty-fifty F1.8 USM (I replaced the F1.8 II which was noisy, no manual focus override and slower focus)
The new fitty is my favorite convenient lightweight fast lens that handles things a bit wider than my 18-35.

If I'm going for quality, I round it out with a third lens, a 70-200 F4L with IS (you need it with telephoto and APS-C, particularly when as slow as F4 so you can't override handshake with a fast shutter as well as the F1.8s from earlier)

I don't need to bring the 18-135mm with me if I bring those 3 lenses, and I get better pictures with the 3, but carrying 3 lenses and swapping is less convenient, making the 18-135mm a good traveling or lazy-day lens.
Sure, shots won't look quite as good, but the shot you miss because you left your 3-lens bag at home isn't gonna win any contests either, so both setups have benefits.

To reiterate, internet's full of sample images. The 18-35 takes a shit all over 18-135mm on quality. It's heavy, large and gorgeous.

>>2834868
Samyang 16mm/2 EXTRA SHARP, better then smigma 18-35 wide open and exelent stopped down.
Standart 50mm STM - no comments.
Samyang 85mm - Same is 16mm, exelent sharpness for 20+ mpix matrix.
Tamron 70-300 VC

File: highres-Samyang-12mm-f2-0-NCS-CS-MFT-Lens-6_1415283596[1].jpg (3 MB, 2490x2207) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 2490x2207

This little fucker right here. Samyang/Rokinon 12mm F2
Amazing lens. And considering the price its a steal.
And guess what. You dont need autofocus on this. Just set to infinity, set to F4 and you have everything in focus.
Very sharp. Very versatile. Go buy one.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-M5
Camera Software	Version 2.0
Photographer	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2014:11:06 14:15:11
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/14.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	45.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2490
Image Height	2207
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	Low Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Unique Image ID	d4dcf37d5f8be6a3ec290d7d4f4c58bf

>>2836072
Mirrorless only you massive tool. OP clearly said he has a Canon 80D.

>>2836076
not that silly anon, but the 8mm version is for aps-c and just as nice

>>2836072
>a steal, to pay $400 for a manual lens with no technology, can't capture moving targets and horrible soft images at F2-F4.
That's not versatile, sharp or a deal, Mr.Samyang korean salesman.

>>2836077
That is also mirrorless only. Kindly fuck off.

File: highres-Samyang12mm_MTF_1417442186[1].jpg (145 KB, 640x480) Image search: [Google]

145 KB, 640x480

>>2836078
>horrible soft images at F2-F4.
how stupid are you? this is a super sharp lens thats even sharper than zeiss 12mm, you nigger. Do your fucking research before shitposting.

>>2836078
and yes, you can shoot moving objects. Its ultra wide so nearly everything is in focus once set to infinity and stepped down a little. Fuck me, do you kids even know how gear works?

Guys, you recommend Sigma 18-35/f 1.8, but way too many users complain about serious autofocus problems. Do you have any personal experience with this lens?

>>2836096
yeah its shit. The focal lenght is awkward an is not worth the extra stop, its just not that convenient. Oh and the lens is fucking huge. 17 elements in 12 groups. Thats fucking disaster. No picture going through that many glass can have nice contrast and accurate colours.

>>2836224
so a lens with 1 element would have the best IQ then? why hasn't anyone made one of those yet?

>>2836253
There are trade-offs. The more elements you have, the more you can correct for things. The less elements you have, the less degradation you have of colors and contrast. Usually, you do best in the middle.

The lens in question has so many elements because it's so wide, and so fast. For wide-angle on a DSLR, you need lots of elements to "turn" the light so it can fall on the sensor correctly. Then you get elements to adjust the different wavelengths of light to hit correctly to minimize aberrations and softness. Then you get elements to combat vignetting, which is usually an issue on wide lenses (and the problem gets worse the larger the aperture).

The lens is great, really. Reviews say it's great, samples say it's great, and people who use it love it. The people who say it sucks are mostly a vocal minority who get a bad copy (happens to every lens) or people who have never been in the same room with one, and decide it sucks based on some made up bullshit in their head. For instance
>17 elements in 12 groups. Thats fucking disaster.

>>2836256
>are mostly a vocal minority who get a bad copy (happens to every lens)
It happens a lot more often with Sigma lenses, even after the Art line.

>>2836267
[citation needed]

>>2836274
Even Sigma admitted their quality control is not on par with the likes of Tamron or the first party lens manufacturers.
It only means if you get a faulty product you don't just pout and rant on the internet like a beta faggot but go back to the store and RMA that shit. like you should with any other faulty product.

>>2836304
>Even Sigma admitted their quality control is not on par with the likes of Tamron or the first party lens manufacturers.
[citation needed]

>>2836305
>[citation needed]
[citation needed]

>>2834868
When I shot Canon I was never dissatisfied the 100mm f/2. Cheap and above L quality images. It's a winner!

>>2836256
>Usually, you do best in the middle.

Nonsense.

Usually moar elements = better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cnEnRADDLo

>>2836096
>way too many users complain about serious autofocus problems.

Try it out in the shop before you buy it.
Ask for a different copy if it doesn't pair well with your body.

Every non-shit shop will allow this.
I do it with every lens I buy regardless of brand.

>>2834868

28mm f/1.8

>>2836356
I don't have time to watch nearly 40 minutes of one gear fag sucking off another gear fag, so maybe it's mentioned in there, but every element of glass, regardless of quality, negatively affects transmission. The more extra light there is bouncing around in the lens, the less overall contrast you're going to have.

The elements generally have more benefit to the image quality than detriment to it, so usually it's still worth it, but overall, there are still desirable image quality characteristics that are harmed as others are enhanced.

It's much easier to sell a lens that's ultra sharp and ultra fast, than it is to sell one that has amazing contrast and great color rendition, so it's an easy trade-off to make so long as engineers have been authorized to say fuck-off to weight, size, and cost restrictions.

File: _MG_4602.jpg (1 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x1280

>>2836224
>>2836096

I have the lens, picked it up last Tuesday. Ill post focus chart shots. Mine is absolutely off, I just haven't decided if it is consistently off. If so, the lens is good enough and I got it for a good enough deal that I would buy the dock and calibrate it.

This isn't really science because I was guessing at 45 degrees, but I was using center focus point and resetting to infinity between shots.

In good daylight it seems to be spot on, just yesterday i tried to shoot my old man as he sat in a lazyboy chair half reclined. I focused on his nose and his knee was the only thing sharp. That inconsistency worries me because i want to love this lens. When i manually focus it is so sharp.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 12:29:29
Exposure Time	1/640 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	32.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836368
>I'm too lazy to learn from the master, but here is my uninformed opinion......

File: _MG_5317.jpg (1 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x1280

>>2836369
this is cropped in almost about 1:1

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 12:37:01
Exposure Time	1/4000 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836369
>In good daylight it seems to be spot on

The problem is with your camera then.

>>2836377
fuck that means i have to broaden my testing across my other lenses to confirm that. I have never noticed it with my other lenses. In fact my cheap little 50mm prime is freakishly sharp and accurate I thought.

>>2836375
>>2836369
Both show front focusing. If you indeed set the focus to infinity then it can be a.) consistent front focusing or b.) focus overtravel. Generally most of Sigma focus complaints mention overtravel, something that cannot be calibrated by the dock, has to be factory repaired or replacing the whole focusing mechanisms including the electronics.
Try the test with focusing set to infinity then set it to minimum focus. Report back what the results are.

>>2836388
It's a T5i. The focus system on it is not good. The issue is most likely with the camera, not the lens.

I had two of them that I used on a 5Dmk3. (One got stolen)
Never had any complaints at all. Focus was reliable and accurate.

>>2834868
I have the sigma 18-35 f/1.8. feels really short. I'm always wishing I just had a 50mm on the camera.

>>2836369
Mine is slightly off focus too. I dont really want to buy that calibrator thing.

>>2836395
Jus let him do the tests proper to determine the problem. A few shots don't mean much, he has to do a bunch of shots to see if the problem is consistent and which way. If it's inconsistent then it can be the camera AF.
The other likely outcomes are consistent front focusing or consistent overtravel.

>>2836400
I'm not suggesting he stop doing the tests, merely pointing out that what he may be blaming on a (great) lens may in fact be his (shit) camera.

The focus points on the rebel series are very inaccurate. Not that they think they're in focus when they aren't, but that they aren't actually only focusing on the "point" you see in the viewfinder. The sensor is much larger than you think it is, so it's locking focus on a diagonal object correctly in its mind, but it's not specific enough to what you were hoping for.

That's why the correct way to test them is to have a target perfectly parallel to the sensor, with a ruler at a 45% angle next to it. Putting the chart at an angle gives too much variation of distance over the single sensor point for it to be in focus, but not where you wanted it to be.

Also, doing it in low light is putting even more stress on the AF system. Doing it in bright light will give the sensor the best chance at a correct lock, putting all of the attention on the lens.

>>2836402
Yeah i see the that the legit focus charts have the focus point perpendicular to the sensor and the 45% plane off to the side. I may have to make one to further test.

I just went out and did the AA battery test and opened up a can of worms. I'll organize them and post a few here in a minute. To give a preview though, the Sigma lense was SO off at higher f-stops that it must be the testing method as you described.

File: _MG_5387.jpg (1 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x1280

So as I don't have the proper chart to focus with I used a test I found with a quick google search.

All photos taken with this test were taken with the focus point of the center battery and specifically, about the L in duralock. The batteries were spaced one half battery width apart in both directions.

First shot with the sigma was had front focus as expected.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:14:36
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836378
Same shit with smigma 30mm. EVERY other lens i have works nice and only this piece of shit missing focus. Even after official service calibration it's still missing in 30-40% shots.

>>2836496
Did you set the initial focus to infinity and then to minimum focus?

File: _MG_5388.jpg (1 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x1280

>>2836496
The second shot was woah, way off. The focus ring was being set to infinity between shots.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:12:52
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836496
>>2836506
If the issue was the lens's calibration, the focus would be incorrect by a repeatable amount, every time. The issue would be a physical issue, meaning that every time the lens communicated being in focus, it would be 2 notches away from accurate, and that would be consistent.

If you're seeing variation, it's not something that can be corrected with calibration, it's an issue in communication between your lens and camera.

File: _MG_5400.jpg (2 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1920x1280

>>2836503
I did shots both ways and it didn't seem to effect that lens. Your wondering about overtravel in that case I'm assuming? Either way this lens was consistently front focusing.

BUT WAIT- there's a plot twist coming.

I tested it in the same manner against my 24-105 f/4L and got this magnificent picture. Seemingly spot on, maybe a tad behind at 105mm and I cropped in to show detail after even with the resize.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:17:26
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	105.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: _MG_5414.jpg (2 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1920x1280

So for fun I ran the aperture down to f/10 and was devastated to find that it began to backfocus like crazy.

There's a lot more pictures with different lenses as well, but these alone kind of tell me that it is more likely a shortcoming with that camera that I am going to have to learn and work with.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:18:57
Exposure Time	1/40 sec
F-Number	f/10.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	800
Lens Aperture	f/10.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	105.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836515
If it is front focusing from both ways then it is lens calibration issue. It can be simply calibrated either by it's dock thing or by the camera AF fine adjustment function if it has any.
You're in luck, the lens is an easy fix.

File: _MG_5403.jpg (1 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x1280

Same with my nifty 50, good wide open...

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:42:00
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

File: _MG_5411.jpg (2 MB, 1920x1280) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1920x1280

then stop it down and weird things start to happen.

I'm still holding out hope that it may be my testing method and shooting rather than lens or camera body issue.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS REBEL T5i
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.5.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	70 dpi
Vertical Resolution	70 dpi
Image Created	2016:05:11 15:43:21
Exposure Time	1/50 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2836525
>>2836518
Your camera is focusing with the lens wide open, there is no difference when you close the aperture. It can be the AF inconsistency between shots, but that is given with the T5i.

This thread has become a Duracell ad.

>>2836079
Except it's not you mouthbreather. I just bought one in F mount and it's sitting right next to me

>>2836582
Calm your tits nerdbrain, Samyang international site only listed the mirrorless mounts. The UK site lists all the other mounts too.

File: 1462795822374.jpg (84 KB, 907x661) Image search: [Google]

84 KB, 907x661

>sigma 18-35 f1.8 is good

you guys really can't focus ;^) on the topic can you

>>2836369
Welcome to Sigma ownership. Just return it and save yourself the headache.

I've owned about 5-6 sigma lenses. All suck at focusing on Canon.

>>2836528
Read up on focus shift.

>>2837753
interesting, but I feel like that just leaves me with more questions.

Yeah I just put my RMA request in.

Shame two I really hate returning things and wanted to like this.

This:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918894-REG/sigma_30mm_f_1_4_dc_hsm.html