- This topic is empty.
which of these lens’s are the better choice?
-
I want to replace my standard canon 18-55 mm lens. which of the following lens are the better option?
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-17-85mm-4-5-6-Stabilized-Digital/dp/B0002Y5WXO
or
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-70mm-2-8-4-5-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000EGAMBW
based on raw spec’s i like the sigma as its pretty fast considering, but the canon has anti vibration technology.
You can check the Fred miranda reviews.
I have a 120-300 F2.8 Sigma and a 70-200 F2.8 Sigma and I am really happy with those 2 :D
I have a Sigma 24-60 f2.8 which is a great lens and gives you f2.8 thro the whole range!Depends if you want to give up the 6-7mm at the wide end?
What budget do you have :?: :?:
Steve
As my camera is a crop camera ( 400d) im a little afraid to give up the few mm at the wide end. that lens would be a 38-96 on my camera.
it would definately be useful but i would then need another wide angle lens ( prob need one anyway but cant be paying out that kinda money at present!)
If you shoot landscapes have you considered the Sigma 10-20. I got one last week and love it. It really opens up a and adds a whole new feature to your images.
What other lenses do you have now? And what do you plan on using it for?
Jim
I have Canon 28-135 f4-5.6 IS USM
And canon 70-300 IS USMI take mostly landscape photography so i will buy soon the Sigma 10-20 EX
i have the standard canon 18-55 and sigma 70-300 apo 4-5.6.
I want to replace the standard canon lens with one that covers me completely from 18mm(ish) up to 70mm. Yes, i could get the wide angle sigma but currently i have spent all my money on the 400d, sigma 70-300, manfrotto tripod, sd cards, camera bag, uv filters, polarizing filter and i cant fork out 300+ for a lens that i wont use much.
i wnat to get a walkabout lens, to be used 90% of the time, that will teach me lots and wont leave my wallet unrecognizable.
the sigma seems to be the recommended one, as long as i dont get a lemon.
I had the 17-70 for 1.5 years and I am very happy with it.
Most of my photos are taken with it.
From what I have heard the Sigma 17-70 is better than the 17-85 in almost every aspect but the IS.
I have considered replacing it with a 17-40L, but I am not sure I would gain much in quality.I have the Canon, and I have to say the IS is the bees knees. I was on a night walk in Paris at new year, and got shots that’d have been impossible without it (think 1/8s 1600, even 3200 ISO – taking a tripod wasn’t a runner). It’s also pretty good from a size/weight/range perspective as a walkaround lens, which is why I got it.
The downside is some ugly barrel distortion at the wide end, and the fact that f4 maximum aperture lasts until around 21mm, and f5.6 kicks in around 30mm :(
John
I’m looking for a good all-purpose wide angle zoom lens for canon crop frame too. I have a Sigma 15-30mm which I find to be a great lens, but I really want something that stretches a bit further AND with a wider aperture throughout the range.
I also have a Sigma 24-70mm 28 and a Sigma 50-150mm 2.8. I’m thinking of selling both of these and investing in a Canon ef-s 17-55 2.8 IS – I’ve been doing a lot of reading on this one and it sounds like a better buy than the 17-40mm L. If anyone has any experience with this lens could they please let me know?
The other possibility would be the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8, but I haven’t heard as much positive feedback on this one. Again, if anyone out there has used this, I’d appreciate thoughts.
The only problem I know of with the Canon is that it costs a small fortune :evil:
PS For anyone who is interested, I love my Sigma 50-150mm 2.8 8)
I’d find the 70-200mm a bit long at the wide end on a crop frame.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
