On the market for a new lens

lucky_13

lucky_13

Messages
624
Name
Billy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello everyone after selling my canon 15-85 last year and having to make do with only a canon 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 70-300 vc usd I'm contemplating on a new zoom for the wider/ mid ranges as I don't really shoot wide I've narrowed it down to only 4 lenses and yes I know that 2 of them are not going to be wide on a crop body but that doesn't matter to me. Which would you choose and why?
Tamron 24-70 F/2.8 VC USD
A lil bit expensive

Canon 24-105 F/4 IS USM
Not the fastest AF speed nor the sharpest

SIGMA 18-35 F/1.8 HSM A
Not a very long zoom

CANON 17-55 F/2.8 IS USM
Fear not sharp wide open and expensive.

I have some reservations about each lens but I guess I'll have to compromise somewhere.
 
On a crop camera i would be looking at the 17-55 Canon or the Sigma 18-35.

But as you say you don't use wide much maybe the 24-70mm range,or do you feel you like to try wide ? :)
 
All of them can work pretty well and good copies should have no real sharpness issues. The choice would depend on your exact needs, upgrade strategy and / or budget. I don't think anyone else can answer your question.
 
17-55 f/2.8 IS. And not just because I have one for sale on here, because it's the best walkabout lens I've ever had and if it fit my 5D3 I would still be using it.
 
Another option would be the Canon 15-85IS which gets a very good following...

I've the 24-105 and am very happy with it - I did look at the 17-55 / 15-85 lenses, but wanted something with a bit more reach over the wider end...
 
First decide if you want the wider end or not, if as you say you don't ditch the sigma and 17-55mm as both particularly the sigma just cover the wide end you said you didn't 't need. Next decide if f2.8 is what you want or are you willing to compromise on f4 to get more length. After that you will have the answer personally from what you've said I 'd say get a 15-85mm as it fits the bill.
 
Thank you all for the replys. To the last 2 posts I did have the 15-85 and I got rid of it as I just didn't like it. I liked it's AF speed and it was a sharp lens but a variable aperture 3.5-5.6 was a big downfall along with some design flaws, like the double barrel and the useless manual focusing ring and the lens creep, although this is only my opinion. I wanted the 24-105 prior to buying the 15-85 but everyone said it wasn't wide enogh on a crop so I got the 15-85 used it for a year and a half and didn't like it. It was a steping stone. I would choose the Tamron 24-70 F/2.8 VC USD as focal length, constant aperture and VC are what I want but it is a bit expensive which is why I was considering the others too.
 
lucky_13 said:
Thank you all for the replys. To the last 2 posts I did have the 15-85 and I got rid of it as I just didn't like it. I liked it's AF speed and it was a sharp lens but a variable aperture 3.5-5.6 was a big downfall along with some design flaws, like the double barrel and the useless manual focusing ring and the lens creep, although this is only my opinion. I wanted the 24-105 prior to buying the 15-85 but everyone said it wasn't wide enogh on a crop so I got the 15-85 used it for a year and a half and didn't like it. It was a steping stone. I would choose the Tamron 24-70 F/2.8 VC USD as focal length, constant aperture and VC are what I want but it is a bit expensive which is why I was considering the others too.
Click to expand...

Then I think you need to either buy the 24-105 or, if it's the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 you really want, save up and buy that one.

I was told years ago, it's better to wait and buy once than to rush in and end up buying twice - which it seems like you've already done buying the 15-85.

Time to decide which "you" want and buy it. :)
 
I love my 17-55 IS.
if you're pixel peeking wide open and have a budget then you're going to be disappointed with all camera things. Good luck with your Gear Acquisition Syndrome :) I'm coming to terms with mine.
I have the 17-55 IS and like it a lot. it's faster focusing imho than the tamron I had, and quieter.
In the studio it's pin sharp, really happy with that. I mean wow! but at f2.8 you will still get the shot you wanted when the light is not on your side.
First rule for me is actually get the shot. after than I can worry about pixels.
For pin sharp at f/2.8 I think a prime is the way forwards.
I'm selling mine however, to fund a 24-70 Tamron VC. I'd love to keep the 17-55 but can't afford it really with a FF camera in the bag.
Otherwise I would certainly keep it!

If I had loads of money, I would go for the 24-70 L ii but then my back would suffer more as well as my bank balance! such is "GAS"

Have you decided yet?
for what you get, a 2nd hand 17-55 is good value I think
 
Hi I went to my local camera store and tested out side by side on the same subject the Canon 24-105, the Tamron 24-70 and the Sigma 18-35 F/1.8. The Fastest lens to AF was the Canon and was always spot on, followed by the Tamron and by the sigma, all 3 lenses were tested at their widest apertures up to F/8. Once I got home I uploaded the images onto lightroom and it was obvious that at all apertures the Canon 24-105 was the sharpest followed by the sigma and than the tamron. I think I will go for the 24-105 as I have a 50 1.8 anyways for the low light capabilities but IQ wise and AF performance the 24-105 at least on my experience was set on a class of it's own.
 
Hi lucky_13. I would like to know what you think about the Canon 24-105. I am having a very similar dilemma to yours. I like the Canon 24-105 but I love f2.8 of 17-55; than I also read all the brilliant reviews of Tamron 24-70 vc. Well I like you have 50mm 1.8 and I also own 18-135 which I want to replace with something sharper. That's why I am thinking of 24-105. Would be interesting to hear your opinion about it. Thanks
 
on a crop I think 24mm isn't wide enough
sharpness should be the last thing you look at after you've focused, have the colours and lack of fringing
my 17-55 IS was nice. If you need to shoot at f2.8 it's normally for effect or because you have to, so don't worry about fine pixels when you know you have a good shot where another lens would have given you a blurry mush!
the canon L are nice, and the 24-105 that I've looked at focussed brilliantly and was lovely to use. Maybe nicer than my tamron 24-70 but not massively so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top