Canon fit lens choices Pt.2

J

jonnybloo

Messages
288
Edit My Images
No
I posted a few week ago about finding an all purpose fast canon fit lens. I won’t bring that thread back up as the questions I now have will get lost in my ramblings on it! I’m looking for some opinion on these options.

I have searched high and low and read/re-read reviews, looked at example, and this is what ive come down too and any reservations I have (which hopefully you can dispel!):


What I have: Canon 550d, 50mm 1.8, 18-55mm kit lens

What I want/take: Portrait (fast moving child!), often indoors on grim northern days!, general shots too (landscape, objects etc), something that makes a photo pop a little that sharpness and DOF you get with a nice portrait. Macro capabilities would be nice too


Option A
Canon 24-105 f4 – Is it quick enough indoors/low light? For indoor portraits can I get enough DOF at the wider end and within smaller(indoors) spaces? I keep coming back to this lens but at the price it would probably be a one lens purchase rather than a prime to complement it

Option B
Sigma/Canon 50mm f1.4 + Tamron 17-50 Non VC – This covers a lot shorter range but gives me a day to day lens and a portrait/low light lens, is the 50mm 1.4 upgrade well worth it as I have the cheap 1.8 now? I wasn’t blown away with a friends Tamron but maybe after reading reviews and looking at examples at every lens imaginable I set my expectations way too high! The Sigma could be replaced by the canon 50mm 1.4 though I hear the sigma is much better assuming you can get a good one!

Option C
Sigma 30mm 1.4 + Canon 60mm 2.8 Macro + Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro - Covers a wider range, gives me DOF, speed and sharpness by all accounts. May be out of budget though. I can’t decide on the Sigma as I keep seeing reviews/examples where it just doesn’t look like it matches up to the Sigma 50mm, hopefully im wrong though ?? The 60mm is on here mainly for portraits, mainly because im not sure the 30mm to 50mm gap is justified but equally I could swap the 60mm for a 50mm (or use my 1.8). I could amend this to have a wide angle + 50 + 100 but I haven’t seen a wide angle that would be cheap enough to justify buying (less used)


Just to add there are 2 other lenses on my wish lists that are definite for the future and cover a broader focal range, I just can’t justify them at the moment as they would be used least, they are: Canon 100mm f2.8 Macro (as I want to learn Macro photography, the detail fascinates me!) and the Canon 70-200 f4 (looks a fantastic lens and covers the range I’m missing).

Any more pointers / tips / responses to the concerns above / ways of just kicking me over the edge and committing to just buying something!!
 
Don't buy too many lenses as you start out, as too many lenses will end up confusing and frustrating you. Personally I would suggest getting something in a 'standard range' that is suitable for a crop camera. From what the type of photos you want above I would suggest getting either of the following lenses (in order of preference - top my preferred)
Canon 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM
Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM OS
Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 VC
Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO
Tamron 17-50mm F2.8

Any of these lenses will provide you with the IQ and speed you are after. IS (OS or VC) won't help you with a fast moving child. The USM and HSM focusing will help focus quickly.

I have the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO and from F5.6 on Lightroom I find it sharp to a 1-1 pixel level . It doesn't have HSM or IS, but it is still quick to focus and doesn't hunt too much (something both Tamrons are known for) and it is £400 cheaper the Canon lens.
 
Thanks Dave

I should have explained, this is more of a gradual wish list, i will need to hunt around for 2nd hand copies if i get more than 1. So i will be buying, learning and then adding. Im just trying to get the bigger picture in my head of what i will eventually cover.

I think my main thing is to go for the one lens option: canon 24-105, cover the range with a good quality lens, or in order to meet my needs with portraits/low light whether to split it with other lenses?

Thanks for the recommendations too, i have agonised over each one loads, the Canon 17-55 i ruled out on cost, the Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM OS is different. Every time i look into it (and the same goes for the 24-70 2.8 HSM) i am almost convinced but i find loads of reviews/opinions that rip them apart, plus when i look on fleabay there are hardly any on there. As an example, there is a lens sample website, i looked on there at the 24-70 HSM and in 2/3 years there are about 20-30 pages of samples, compared to other lenses which have hundreds, almost as if no one bothers with that lens ? Maybe im imagining it?!
 
ive got a 24-105 and a sig 50 1.4 and for portraits i always seem to reach for the canon.

was very handy for a wedding we did but that was with some fill flash.

and going on from what dave said, we've had 2 of the sig 18-50 2.8 mac and theyve both been phenomenal, even at 2.8. but then wont work on anything other than a 1.6x sensor (which is why we sold them on).
 
You're biggest issue with both the 24-105 and the Sigma 24-70 will be that they're not particularly wide on your Crop body. I've had a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for the last 4 years and it's my workhorse lens (40D body) for everything from studio portraits, weddings, landscapes and days out so I'd highly recommend it. You can pick them up easily second hand for around £200 and won;t lose much on it if you sell it on.

The canon 24-105 is an excellent lens but much heavier so may be slightly unbalanced on your 550D. Also, F4 is great on a full frame camera but doesn't give you as much benefit on a crop in low light.

Cheers
Steve
 
Steve/Neil

Thanks for the advise

"F4 is great on a full frame camera but doesn't give you as much benefit on a crop in low light. "

I think this is what im worried about and why im going back and forth so much. Im not too bothered about losing that 7/8mm at the wide end its just the speed/DOF etc of the 24-105 that im worried about. At the price its putting all my eggs in one basket too.

Out of interest, do you tend to shoot on the Tamron/Sigma's at 2.8 or do you think there is still an advantage of having a 30mm/50mm 1.4 ?
 
Don't buy loads of stuff all at once, and spend as much as you can on the one lens that you'll use most.

Lessons I have learned the hard way are that no lens is ever quite what you think it will be, and that knocks-on to the next choice.

Get a Canon 17-55. You will probably find, as I did, it will do a damn good job of most things and will hardly be off the camera. You have a 50/1.8, leave it at that for now.

70-200L goes perfectly with the 17-55. I sold a 100 macro and now use tubes on the 70-200 that I find much more versatile. I'm not into close 1:1 macro though, and you'd be better off with a pukka macro if that's your goal.

Get the 17-55 and see where that takes you. Probably quite a long way. And a Raynox DCR-250 macro adapter for now - bargain at £40 (Amazon).
 
Thanks Richard

So the extra £ for the Canon is justified then? I know the Tamron gets very good reviews for the money and the Canon is significantly more than the Tamron. I will look into it a bit more, i think i have always been blinded by the cost compared to the alternatives.

"Lessons I have learned the hard way are that no lens is ever quite what you think it will be, and that knocks-on to the next choice."

I have looked at so many samples/opinions of every lens imaginable that my expectations are all over the show. Its hard to find that quality vs cost compromise when its a hobby i guess.

With regards to the tubes/adapter, if not 1:1, what kind of ratio can they produce as that sounds like a good option too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top