Help Please - lens choice!

[Jonleeper]

Still new to digital but trying to improve, arn't we all! Got a second hand 10D, and love it very much. Initially I purchased the Sigma 18 - 200 f3.5-6.3 DC as a good walkabout lens and then added the Canon 70 - 300 f4-5.6 IS USM for the extra length.

I have just found out that I am allowed to go to Birmingham (Pistonheads Show) at the weekend and am thinknig that I will need something a bit faster/better to take full advantage of the oppertunity. Pricewise I have about £300 immediately avaliable and was therfore thinking that another Sigma would be the better option. However I am totally confused by the designations and options avaliable.

Initla impresions are these:

17-70 f2.8-4.5 DC Macro
24-70 f2.8 EX DC Macro
24-135 f2.8-4.8 Aspherical

They are all avaliable within budget from Jessops (I know but I would have to collect the lens from a shop due to the time frame).

I would normally err towards the fixed aperture but does anyone have any advice or better ideas?

Many thanks,

Jon

[Dogsey]

My experience of the EX range is that they are fantastic quality for the money, never used that particular one though.

[Jonleeper]

Just to add to the confusion I have just seen the 24-60 f 2.8 EX DG.

AGHHHHHHH!

[TonyHetherington]

As a walk about lens for that sort of money, you really can't go wrong with the Canon 17-85 IS USM F4-5.6. It really is a great lens

[Jonleeper]

Tony,

According to Camera Price Buster that Canon lens is about £100 more expensive, ie 50% more. Is it really that much better than the Sigma?

[sidaorb]

24-70 F2.8 is a cracking lens although it doesnt have the HSM. Got rid of mine last year, still have my 70-200 F2.8 EX HSM which is a cracking lens and about to get the 120-300mm at Focus in February if I can get a decent price.
Carl

[TonyHetherington]

Jonleeper said:

Tony,

According to Camera Price Buster that Canon lens is about £100 more expensive, ie 50% more. Is it really that much better than the Sigma?

Blimey I don't remember paying that much for it?!

Don't tell my girlfriend

[TonyHetherington]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-EF-S-17-85mm-4-0-5-6...

Amazon have it for 338 - that's better

[BigMansZetec]

I too have been looking at similar lenses as a replacement to the 400D's kit 18-55mm lens. And after much thought and review reading I think I am settled on the first one on your list, the Sigma 17-70mm. All the reviews seem positive and some say it is capable of competing with more expensive equivalents.

Its also well within your budget.

[sidaorb]

Just to chuck another one in the equation Canon's 28-135mm IS is a fantastic lens. My everday one.

[matthew_h]

EF-S lenses definitely won't work on a 10D without being modified.

[RobDickinson]

TonyHetherington said:

As a walk about lens for that sort of money, you really can't go wrong with the Canon 17-85 IS USM F4-5.6. It really is a great lens

IMO its a sucky lens for the price, but whatever doesnt work on the 10D.

I've heard a lot of good things about the sigma 24-70f2.8's

Thought about a good prime? Bleh the sigma 30mm f1.4 is EF-S

[flat-planedCrank]

You mention shooting indoors at the Pistonheads show, so imo, i'd bin all the other options for a constant f2.8 lens. It'll focus better and stopped down should outperform all the slower lenses, only other issue is stabilisation...


Had this discussion on here before ..but personally i'd not go for the 17-85mm if you are looking at the retail price.


Alternatives - How do you feel about a prime lens ? Depends how wide angle you want, if 50mm is enough then Canon does a 50mm f1.4 for about £230 (online).


As for Jessops, they used to have a offer where they would match any lens price in the same magazine as their own advert. Might be worth trying to haggle regardless, that 50mm is £289.99 on Jessops site (and that price is £20 less than normal because its on sale)


Cheers.

[Podie]

sidaorb said:

Just to chuck another one in the equation Canon's 28-135mm IS is a fantastic lens. My everday one.

I'd say that was a good bet.

[Luca Brazzi]

I'm about to sell my Tamron 28-75 2.8 XRDi lens. Interested?
LB

[TonyHetherington]

Quinny said:

The 17-85 IS won't work on a 10D anyway.

Ooops sorry chaps. Discount my suggestion then

[bramley]

flat-planedCrank said:

You mention shooting indoors at the Pistonheads show, so imo, i'd bin all the other options for a constant f2.8 lens.

Wot he said ^

I've also heard good things about Sigma's 24-70 f2.8 so if that's in budget it's probably the best choice.

[Byker28i]

Interesting as I'm currently trying to decide what to replace my kit lens with on my 40D.

I have the Canon EF 10-22, 70-200, 100-400, so was thinking of either the EF24-70 f2.8L or the 24-105 F4 L IS. I want it as a general purpose, walkabout lens.

The 24-70 is attractive with f2.8, but weighs 960gms, the 24-105 has a longer reach, but is a fixed F4 throughout the range and with IS.

Decisions, decisions...

[Podie]

When we replaced our kit lenses we went for the (rather budget conscious, second hand) 28-105 II f/3.5-4.5, and a 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 which have been fantastic without breaking the bank. I’d also highly recommend the 50mm f/1.8, which is a must for what is, quite frankly, less than a tank of fuel these days…

[Luca Brazzi]

Bought the Canon 24-70 L 2.8 this morning....arrives tomorrow ...hence now selling the Tamron. Email me if interested. Will be at the PH show on Friday photographing...and probably Sat. afternoon also.