Lens advice

[Eggle]

After a lot of looking and asking, I have this which I want your opinions on please.
What I want to shoot is landscape / walkabout mainly, with some light tent product / food shots.
Am I way off with a Sigma 17-70 F2.8 - 4.5 OR Tamron 17 - 50 F2.8
WITH
a 55 - 250 IS?
Would a Nifty be a good lens to have.
I have a 90 cm tent for the product shots, mainly baby clothing and restaurant plated food.
The sigma is ~£170 used, Tamron ~£220. Canon 55 - 350 IS ~£135.
I currently have the std kit 18 - 55 which I will sell on.
Over to you guys please

[Dogsey]

Not sure on the specific lenses you mention, although the 55-250 always seems to get good reviews, but in my opinion you'd be mad not to have a nifty fifty in your bag, it's such a blisteringly sharp lens for so little money.



1/60s . f/4.5 . ISO 400 . 50 mm

Click for bigness.

[Eggle]

Was that taken on a cropped sensor digital?
Nice shot!

[JulianHJ]

I have the Tamron and find that it's very good. I also have a mk2 nifty fifty, that gets very little use unfortunately.

My wife has a Canon 17-40L, and it's noticably nicer!

[Dogsey]

Eggle said:

Was that taken on a cropped sensor digital?
Nice shot!

Yes, Canon 40D, for a cropped sensor it's an awfully good portrait lens for the money.

And thank you, I'm biased as it's my little girl but I do love that shot.

Edited by Dogsey on Saturday 8th May 23:10

[flat-planedCrank]

Eggle said:

After a lot of looking and asking, I have this which I want your opinions on please.
What I want to shoot is landscape / walkabout mainly, with some light tent product / food shots.
Am I way off with a Sigma 17-70 F2.8 - 4.5 OR Tamron 17 - 50 F2.8
WITH
a 55 - 250 IS?
Would a Nifty be a good lens to have.
I have a 90 cm tent for the product shots, mainly baby clothing and restaurant plated food.
The sigma is ~£170 used, Tamron ~£220. Canon 55 - 350 IS ~£135.
I currently have the std kit 18 - 55 which I will sell on.
Over to you guys please

Either of the first two look ok for a walk-around lens. There are a couple of reviews here - Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 and Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Guess they both have their selling points, the Sigma probably focuses closer as its badged macro whereas the Tamron is f2.8 throughout its range.

The 55-250mm does seem to have a pretty good rep, probably the best bang-for-buck telezoom.

I'd get a 50mm f1.8 regardless really, loads of image quality for very little money, great for portraits.


Cheers.

[M-J-B]

Dogsey said:

Not sure on the specific lenses you mention, although the 55-250 always seems to get good reviews, but in my opinion you'd be mad not to have a nifty fifty in your bag, it's such a blisteringly sharp lens for so little money.



1/60s . f/4.5 . ISO 400 . 50 mm

Click for bigness.

Good picture

I've used mine at night with a flash and got pretty good results too



Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/3.2
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 400

Click for original photo.

My next little one is due any day and if not before it'll be dragged out kicking and screaming Tuesday am. I will have the 50D + nifty ready to go

[Eggle]

Looking again, would it be to my advantage to get the 18 - 125 as a walk about? Looking at he spec on the 17 - 70, F2.8 is quickly to F3.5 any way.

Sigma 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC or Sigma 17 70mm F2.8-4.5 Macro DC