What lens to fill in the gap

ecoleman

ecoleman

Messages
6,413
Name
Elliott
Edit My Images
No
Hi everyone,

I have been using a Sigma 18-200mm OS lens for the past year or so, but have never been really pleased with the IQ of the lens. Its not bad, but lacks in sharpness in my opinion., probably due to the long focal length.

I have recently purchased a Canon 70-200 f4 L IS lens which I am very happy with and intend on buying the 24-105 f4 L and a 10-22 (Sigma or Canon) sometime in the future (when the bank balance allows).

I would like to sell the sigma 18-200 but I would need a lens to fill the gap of 18-70mm in the mean time.

I have been looking at the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 and it seems to get some pretty good reviews. I could probably pick it up for the same price that I could sell the 18-200 for.

Does anyone have any thoughts on the Sigma 17-70mm, would it be a good choice. Remember it would only be a stop gap until I can afford the other two lenses.

I am guessing due to the shorter focal length, it would probably be sharper than the 18-200mm.
 
I've read some decent reviews of the 17-70 and it has a useful "macro" range - not full 1:1 macro.

However, you may want to consider the Sigma 18-50 2.8 lens. Whilst this doesn't stretch quite as far as the 17-70 it has a constant 2.8 aperture. It's a bit more expensive but, in my opinion (for what that's worth!) is a very good lens and optically better than the 17-70.

I think that with using decent Canon glass you may find the 17-70 too much of a compromise in terms of image quality
 
daveproctor said:
I've read some decent reviews of the 17-70 and it has a useful "macro" range - not full 1:1 macro.

However, you may want to consider the Sigma 18-50 2.8 lens. Whilst this doesn't stretch quite as far as the 17-70 it has a constant 2.8 aperture. It's a bit more expensive but, in my opinion (for what that's worth!) is a very good lens and optically better than the 17-70.

I think that with using decent Canon glass you may find the 17-70 too much of a compromise in terms of image quality
Click to expand...

Thanks daveproctor,

I know the Sigma 18-50 2.8 is probably a better lens being EX series, but don't really want to spend any more money that what I can sell my 18-200 for. I'd rather save the extra to put towards the Canon 24-105.

Once I have the other two lenses, I will probably sell the 17-70 anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top