The first lens for the Canon EOS 50D

S

SkyQPic

Messages
51
Edit My Images
No
Hi,

I'm considering to buy a DSLR and couldn't choose between the CANON 50D and the NIKON D90. Seems the 50D is a little bit better.

The first lens is also difficult to choose.

What about the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC? Or the Sigma 17-70 F2.8-F4 HSM OS?
Someone also recommended the 50D+17-85 IS USM KIT.

Could anyone of you give some suggestions?

Thanks:cool:
 
Personally I'd discount the 17-85, it's not one of Canons best lenses and IMO is quite pricey for it's performance (especially given the competition). I have the Tamron 17-50mm myself (the non VC, there's been quite a few complaints with the VC version and it's not as sharp as the non VC) and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. It's a fair bit faster than the canon 17-85 (f2.8 constant vs f4-5.6) and a little sharper too by all accounts. And from what I've seen it also has the edge on the 17-70 when it comes to sharpness and speed (although if you need the extra length then the 17-70 is still a good lens). There's also the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 to consider although I tend to avoid sigma due to their poor quality control.
 
sketch145 said:
Personally I'd discount the 17-85, it's not one of Canons best lenses and IMO is quite pricey for it's performance (especially given the competition). I have the Tamron 17-50mm myself (the non VC, there's been quite a few complaints with the VC version and it's not as sharp as the non VC) and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. It's a fair bit faster than the canon 17-85 (f2.8 constant vs f4-5.6) and a little sharper too by all accounts. And from what I've seen it also has the edge on the 17-70 when it comes to sharpness and speed (although if you need the extra length then the 17-70 is still a good lens). There's also the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 to consider although I tend to avoid sigma due to their poor quality control.
Click to expand...
Thanks sketch145!

The 17-50 VC version is more expensive (80 pounds more)than the non-VC version...

Have you ever tried the VC version?
 
sketch145 said:
Personally I'd discount the 17-85, it's not one of Canons best lenses and IMO is quite pricey for it's performance (especially given the competition). I have the Tamron 17-50mm myself (the non VC, there's been quite a few complaints with the VC version and it's not as sharp as the non VC) and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. It's a fair bit faster than the canon 17-85 (f2.8 constant vs f4-5.6) and a little sharper too by all accounts. And from what I've seen it also has the edge on the 17-70 when it comes to sharpness and speed (although if you need the extra length then the 17-70 is still a good lens). There's also the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 to consider although I tend to avoid sigma due to their poor quality control.
Click to expand...

:agree: .....with all of that!

I have the non VC version of the 17-50mm Tamron too and it's a belter! :thumbs:
 
SkyQPic said:
But someone also told me that the images by the VC version are better...
Click to expand...

Can't answer that one, never played with the VC version....My non VC is very very sharp, certainly sharper than my old 50mm f1.8 prime and not far off my 70-200mm f4 L!!

I've never been convinced that VC, IS, OS etc makes much of a difference at wide focal lengths like 17mm....50mm you'd notice the benefit more I guess :shrug:

Is £80 a lot of money to you? Could you better spend it on something else like a 50mm f1.8? Kerso on here sells them for £75 delivered :thumbs:
 
Slimbert said:
Can't answer that one, never played with the VC version....My non VC is very very sharp, certainly sharper than my old 50mm f1.8 prime and not far off my 70-200mm f4 L!!

I've never been convinced that VC, IS, OS etc makes much of a difference at wide focal lengths like 17mm....50mm you'd notice the benefit more I guess :shrug:

Is £80 a lot of money to you? Could you better spend it on something else like a 50mm f1.8? Kerso on here sells them for £75 delivered :thumbs:
Click to expand...
... £80 is surely a lot...
 
i can recommend sigmas 18-50 f2.8, its served me very well over the last few years and ive only just reluctantly had to sell it due to incompatibility with the 1dmk3 1.3x sensor.

lovely sharp lens, excellent colour reproduction, fast AF for a non-HSM.
 
Personally, Id go with the sigma....I used the older version without the OS and found it to be a decent and sharp lens. Although not a constant 2.8 its still worth the money and ill get you some decent shots especially combined with the 50D. Im actually considering it for the wife to go with her 350D..

Cheers
Joel
 
What kind of photography do you want to do?
The Tamron 17-50 is a good lens but does it have the initial focal length you require?
The Canon 17-85 isn't a bad lens to start with but the newer 15-85 would be a better choice if it falls within your budget.
 
hashcake said:
What kind of photography do you want to do?
The Tamron 17-50 is a good lens but does it have the initial focal length you require?
The Canon 17-85 isn't a bad lens to start with but the newer 15-85 would be a better choice if it falls within your budget.
Click to expand...
The 15-85 is out of my budget...that's why I just consider tamron or sigma...
 
Never tried the Tamron as I have the Canon 17-55 f/2.8, but from what you've said about budget the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is definitely the best choice I think. Many have said it's a great lens and you will love the constant f/2.8 aperture. Getting one of the others with a variable aperture will probably leave you disappointed unless you go for a more expensive one.
 
SkyQPic said:
Thanks very much!

By the way...50D VS D90 ? Which one will you recommend?
Click to expand...

Either, they're both good cameras. Get down to your local camera shop and try them both. Also look at offerings by Pentax, Sony and Olympus. Once you've had a play with them all I'm sure one will feel right for you.
 
lauy said:
Never tried the Tamron as I have the Canon 17-55 f/2.8, but from what you've said about budget the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is definitely the best choice I think. Many have said it's a great lens and you will love the constant f/2.8 aperture. Getting one of the others with a variable aperture will probably leave you disappointed unless you go for a more expensive one.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply!
 
eccles said:
Either, they're both good cameras. Get down to your local camera shop and try them both. Also look at offerings by Pentax, Sony and Olympus. Once you've had a play with them all I'm sure one will feel right for you.
Click to expand...
Yes, I've tried them and I think the 50D seems to be a little bit bigger and heavier...Never tried the Pentax, SONY and Olympus DSLRs...It seems that the Pentax K7 is also a nice one but it is more expensive than the 50D. Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top