Enrico Stura Photography

Equipment

A brief description about all the equipment I have or I had.

Canon EOS 350D
My first digital reflex.
It's now 3 years since I have this camera, and I feel "at home" with it. Light, handy... Now that I know where I can find the commands I need, without watching anything, just with a flick of the finger, I wouldn't sell it. My only complains are about the high ISO noise, but nothing is perfect! After buying the 30D I use this body as emergency replacement, luckily until now I didn't need it...

Canon EOS 30D
My current camera body.
I came across a very favourable ad of a guy selling this camera, and I chose to buy it. I don't think that it is significantly better than my 350D, but has some improvement that I appreciate: longer battery life, bigger LCD display, slightly faster autofocus, bigger viewfinder, extended ISO sensibility (but not lower noise), faster continuous shooting. Too bad, it's also a little heavier.

Manfrotto 725b
The tripod I use with all of my lenses.
Maybe not exactly a super-solid one, but light enough to be carried around, and solid enough for all of my lenses. It has a quick-release ball head, integrated. The declared maximum weight is 3.5 Kg, many people could say that it's not enough for my equipment, but I'm sure that with an heavier one I wouldn't feel confortable, particularly in my late-hours strolls around city streets to take night shots.

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM
The widest lens I own.
I'm not a fond of ultra-wide angle lenses, but when I faced problems taking shots of wide architectural structures or landscapes using my 18-200, I decided to get a 12-24. It works good, but I hate the natural pincushion distortion, making objects in the border of the frame look weird. I don't use it too much, since it's also heavy and I often finish carrying around only my 18-200.

Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG
This is my fisheye lens.
I use it mostly to take pictures of landscapes, but one of its features is also the very close minimum focusing distance. This allows to use it like an uncommon macro lens, with the extra benefit of including in the frame much of the surroundings of the subject. Of course, since it's a fisheye lens, distortion is present... and it is clearly noticeable also on APS-C sensors.

Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS
Ultra zoom lens, typical travel equipment.
I owed the previous version (not optically stabilized) of this lens, I used it for lots of photos shown in this site. I always considered it an exceptional quality/price ratio lens, with the classic drawbacks of this kind of "cheapies": too hig f numbers, not exceptional sharpness. Then the stabilized model came out. I think I was one of the first buyers of this new stabilized model (may 2007), without seeing any review of it, I went out and I bought it. The problems of low light shutter speed I had with the previous model became acceptable with the optical stabilizer. And it is surprisingly sharp at 150mm-200mm...

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC
A very luminous standard lens.
I bought this lens, used, when I realized that the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 was very luminous, but too long on APS-C cameras. Even if I use it very seldom, it does what it's intended for. It comes handy for indoor shots, particularly in low-light conditions, churches interiors, blurred backgrounds ("bokeh"). Image quality is acceptable, even not as good as other lenses. It's a bit too heavy, maybe.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4
The fastest (most luminous) lens I have.
I upgraded from the ultra-cheap (and very good) EF 50mm f/1.8 when I realized that it saved me in all the low light conditions. So I thought "50mm f/1.4 will work even better". In fact it is so, even if I noted that I used it at f/1.4 very rarely. Anyway it's a jewel, in terms of sharpness and light. I'm not sure it is one of my favourite focal lenghts, for this reason one year later I also got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC. But when you want to shoot portraits in low light, maybe in pubs, restaurants, churches... it's the best lens I ever used.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
I like to call it my "concert lens".
It has the same optical quality of EF 50mm f/1.4, some people define it "an unacknowledged L series lens". In fact, it is a really sharp lens, rather light, very fast autofocus. Used with APS-C sensors, it is a medium telephoto that comes handy where you need some extra reach for portraits, and typically when you're shooting at concerts. It's a perfect "candid" lens, since it allows you to stay rather far from the subject, and it's f/1.8 makes possible fast shooting freezing expressions.

Sigma 150mm f/2.8 MACRO EX DG HSM
My macro lens, but not only.
I bought this lens when I discovered macro photography, after trying a nice Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro. I would have kept the 50mm, if I couldn't try this one, since it had many advantages: weight, depth of field, cost. But challenging insects isn't so easy to me... considering that I needed to stay too close to them to achieve 1:1 macro ratio (shooting 36x24mm objects filling the whole frame). Another reason that made me choose this lens was the need for a luminous telephoto, since my 18-200 not-OS didn't work acceptably in low light from 100mm to 200mm. It gives good results also when coupled with the Sigma APO 1.4x EX DG teleconverter, becoming a 210mm f/4 mantaining the Autofocus.

Sigma 1.4X APO EX DG
The only teleconverter I use.
Normally I don't use any teleconverter, since I try to focus on quality rather than focal lenght. Anyway, using it with Sigma 150mm MACRO, I can obtain 2:1 macro ratio on my 30D/350D camera (I can fill the whole frame with objects 18mm large). Another common exception is the Canon 300mm f/4 L, that looses just a bit of quality with it, but becomes a practic 420mm f/5.6, often very usable if light is available. I used it in the past with Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS, obtaining good images, before I had my 300mm.

Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG HSM
My birding zoom telephoto.
Almost everybody consider this lens a cheap alternative to other telephoto models. In fact, it's proved that Canon 500mm f/4, 400mm f/5.6, 100-400mm work better... but it is the only possibility to reach 500mm (without multiplying using teleconverters) staying around 1000 Euro. The quality it provides is enough for me, not being a pro. My only promise is this: as soon as Canon will release the EF 400mm f/5.6 L IS I'll change my 50-500 for it. Canon, be quick! :-)

Canon 300mm f/4 L
A good, light telephoto.
This long focal lenght lens really deserves Canon's "L" mark. It's light, so it's not a problem to take it in my backpack during common trips. It has a very good quality (slightly worse than 300mm f/2.8, but its weight is far lighter), also using Sigma 1.4X teconverter it mantains good quality and autofocus. It's not the IS (stabilized) version, but I normally use it for daylight trips, so I don't consider changing it with the IS version.

Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS
Possibly the sharpest lens I have.
Differently from many photographers, I think that 70-200 isn't such a useful focal range, particularly using APS-C cameras (where it becomes a 112-320 effective lenght, referred to 35mm cameras). 70mm is often too long for portraits and landscapes, while 200mm is very often too short for nature photography. And f/4 is not too "quick". Nevertheless, I find this lens perfect in terms of sharpness, focus speed, stabilization (Canon's fourth generation: you can shoot about 10 times slower than normal, if the subject allows it). So, I use it only when I need maximum quality, and I can move freely to catch the subject.

	Canon EOS 350D My first digital reflex. It's now 3 years since I have this camera, and I feel "at home" with it. Light, handy... Now that I know where I can find the commands I need, without watching anything, just with a flick of the finger, I wouldn't sell it. My only complains are about the high ISO noise, but nothing is perfect! After buying the 30D I use this body as emergency replacement, luckily until now I didn't need it...
	Canon EOS 30D My current camera body. I came across a very favourable ad of a guy selling this camera, and I chose to buy it. I don't think that it is significantly better than my 350D, but has some improvement that I appreciate: longer battery life, bigger LCD display, slightly faster autofocus, bigger viewfinder, extended ISO sensibility (but not lower noise), faster continuous shooting. Too bad, it's also a little heavier.
	Manfrotto 725b The tripod I use with all of my lenses. Maybe not exactly a super-solid one, but light enough to be carried around, and solid enough for all of my lenses. It has a quick-release ball head, integrated. The declared maximum weight is 3.5 Kg, many people could say that it's not enough for my equipment, but I'm sure that with an heavier one I wouldn't feel confortable, particularly in my late-hours strolls around city streets to take night shots.
	Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM The widest lens I own. I'm not a fond of ultra-wide angle lenses, but when I faced problems taking shots of wide architectural structures or landscapes using my 18-200, I decided to get a 12-24. It works good, but I hate the natural pincushion distortion, making objects in the border of the frame look weird. I don't use it too much, since it's also heavy and I often finish carrying around only my 18-200.
	Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG This is my fisheye lens. I use it mostly to take pictures of landscapes, but one of its features is also the very close minimum focusing distance. This allows to use it like an uncommon macro lens, with the extra benefit of including in the frame much of the surroundings of the subject. Of course, since it's a fisheye lens, distortion is present... and it is clearly noticeable also on APS-C sensors.
	Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS Ultra zoom lens, typical travel equipment. I owed the previous version (not optically stabilized) of this lens, I used it for lots of photos shown in this site. I always considered it an exceptional quality/price ratio lens, with the classic drawbacks of this kind of "cheapies": too hig f numbers, not exceptional sharpness. Then the stabilized model came out. I think I was one of the first buyers of this new stabilized model (may 2007), without seeing any review of it, I went out and I bought it. The problems of low light shutter speed I had with the previous model became acceptable with the optical stabilizer. And it is surprisingly sharp at 150mm-200mm...
	Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC A very luminous standard lens. I bought this lens, used, when I realized that the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 was very luminous, but too long on APS-C cameras. Even if I use it very seldom, it does what it's intended for. It comes handy for indoor shots, particularly in low-light conditions, churches interiors, blurred backgrounds ("bokeh"). Image quality is acceptable, even not as good as other lenses. It's a bit too heavy, maybe.
	Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 The fastest (most luminous) lens I have. I upgraded from the ultra-cheap (and very good) EF 50mm f/1.8 when I realized that it saved me in all the low light conditions. So I thought "50mm f/1.4 will work even better". In fact it is so, even if I noted that I used it at f/1.4 very rarely. Anyway it's a jewel, in terms of sharpness and light. I'm not sure it is one of my favourite focal lenghts, for this reason one year later I also got the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC. But when you want to shoot portraits in low light, maybe in pubs, restaurants, churches... it's the best lens I ever used.
	Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 I like to call it my "concert lens". It has the same optical quality of EF 50mm f/1.4, some people define it "an unacknowledged L series lens". In fact, it is a really sharp lens, rather light, very fast autofocus. Used with APS-C sensors, it is a medium telephoto that comes handy where you need some extra reach for portraits, and typically when you're shooting at concerts. It's a perfect "candid" lens, since it allows you to stay rather far from the subject, and it's f/1.8 makes possible fast shooting freezing expressions.
	Sigma 150mm f/2.8 MACRO EX DG HSM My macro lens, but not only. I bought this lens when I discovered macro photography, after trying a nice Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro. I would have kept the 50mm, if I couldn't try this one, since it had many advantages: weight, depth of field, cost. But challenging insects isn't so easy to me... considering that I needed to stay too close to them to achieve 1:1 macro ratio (shooting 36x24mm objects filling the whole frame). Another reason that made me choose this lens was the need for a luminous telephoto, since my 18-200 not-OS didn't work acceptably in low light from 100mm to 200mm. It gives good results also when coupled with the Sigma APO 1.4x EX DG teleconverter, becoming a 210mm f/4 mantaining the Autofocus.
	Sigma 1.4X APO EX DG The only teleconverter I use. Normally I don't use any teleconverter, since I try to focus on quality rather than focal lenght. Anyway, using it with Sigma 150mm MACRO, I can obtain 2:1 macro ratio on my 30D/350D camera (I can fill the whole frame with objects 18mm large). Another common exception is the Canon 300mm f/4 L, that looses just a bit of quality with it, but becomes a practic 420mm f/5.6, often very usable if light is available. I used it in the past with Canon 70-200mm f/4 L IS, obtaining good images, before I had my 300mm.