Hi,
just bought a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 Macro, just got it really to replace my canon 28-70 F2.8L as I didn't feel it was wide enough for me and to be honest it was a bit of overkill ( weight and pricewise ) for my purposes, so thought I would downgrade, get a bit of cash back for the holiday to Rhodes coming up and get something a bit wider at the same time.
Spent ages trying to decide if it was the right move, but in the end I managed to convince myself, I think I will get more use with the Sigma as I tend to have my 100-400L attached to the camera pretty much most of the time. The macro capabilities will be handy too, ok I know it's not 1:1 but it will do in the meantime as I have access to a Canon 100 F2.8 that my dad owns so no worries there for proper macro if needed.
If the cashback deals had still been running for Canon I might have been tempted for a 17-85IS ( owned one previously ), but figured the Sigma was probably a bit better/sharper and the 17-85 is now well over £300 new. The Sigma worked out at £193.60 from Cameras2u.com with a further 2% cashback via Quidco to come ( and no Kerso can't do this one I asked
).
Sorry to ramble on in what is probably is a meaningly post, but I am sure many of you have been in the same boat when it comes to lens choice/decisions, it doesn't help when lens manufacturer's don't have a comparable set of lenses, ie: Tamron has the 17-35, 17-50, canon has 16-35, 17-40, 17-85, 24-105 etc and Sigma have 18-50, 17-70 etc etc.
Ok ramble over, new toy will be here tomorrow, hopefully get out with it over the weekend
Mike.
just bought a Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 Macro, just got it really to replace my canon 28-70 F2.8L as I didn't feel it was wide enough for me and to be honest it was a bit of overkill ( weight and pricewise ) for my purposes, so thought I would downgrade, get a bit of cash back for the holiday to Rhodes coming up and get something a bit wider at the same time.
Spent ages trying to decide if it was the right move, but in the end I managed to convince myself, I think I will get more use with the Sigma as I tend to have my 100-400L attached to the camera pretty much most of the time. The macro capabilities will be handy too, ok I know it's not 1:1 but it will do in the meantime as I have access to a Canon 100 F2.8 that my dad owns so no worries there for proper macro if needed.
If the cashback deals had still been running for Canon I might have been tempted for a 17-85IS ( owned one previously ), but figured the Sigma was probably a bit better/sharper and the 17-85 is now well over £300 new. The Sigma worked out at £193.60 from Cameras2u.com with a further 2% cashback via Quidco to come ( and no Kerso can't do this one I asked
).Sorry to ramble on in what is probably is a meaningly post, but I am sure many of you have been in the same boat when it comes to lens choice/decisions, it doesn't help when lens manufacturer's don't have a comparable set of lenses, ie: Tamron has the 17-35, 17-50, canon has 16-35, 17-40, 17-85, 24-105 etc and Sigma have 18-50, 17-70 etc etc.
Ok ramble over, new toy will be here tomorrow, hopefully get out with it over the weekend
Mike.
