Which walkabout lens?

HybridUK

HybridUK

Suspended / Banned
Messages
447
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Good evening all.

Hoping someone can point me out in the right direction here. I'm basically after a decent-ish walkabout/general purpose lens for my 400D. My budget is roughly about 240ish, no more at the time being.

I've been looking at the following lens' and i'm REALLLLLY stuck on what to do.

Sigma 24-70mm 2.8- I heard this lens isn't as sharp as the Tamron listed below and also suffers from bad lens flare.
Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 - Only bad thing i can find about this lens is that it's quite a weird focal lenght on a crop sensor.
Sigma 17-70mm - This lens seems to tick all of the boxes except it's not 2.8 through all of the range.

Which one would you go for and why?

Help is greatly needed and muchly appreciated. :)
 
I really like the Nikon 18-70, it's a superb lens. Maybe look at the Sigma 17-70 for your Canon like you mention?

Either than, or a nifty fifty? - I've just bought one (should arrive any day now - f/1.8) and may well end up being my walk around lens.
 
Hi Dave,

I already have the nifty fifty but i find that too 'zoomed' for some of my shots.

The Sigma 17-70mm is cheaper too ;-)
 
If you have the kit lens to fill the wide end then the Tamron is very sharp. I used it as my walkabout on the 20D and it constantly impressed me.
 
I am thinking really seriously about the Sigi 18-50 f/2.8 EX macro
Also supposed to be very good and better than the 17-70 macro.
 
Or another option is to go with prime lenses and take a 35mm f/2 everywhere. I am a Nikon user so not sure if the Canon line up also offers the same. Probably does.
I am not sure if I could live without zoom, but I looked at a load of older photos recently, taken with the kit lens 18-55mm and most of them were at 18, 35 and 55.
 
I got my missus an EF28-135 IS for use as a general lens on her 30D. Quality seems fine and they're as cheap as chips at the moment as they've been put as kit lenses on some of the recent bodies. 200 quid should get you a secondhand unused one.

Bob
 
I'm just not sure if i should just save up more and go for the Canon 24-105mm F4L?

I'm really confuzled at the moment for which route to go down.
 
I bought the Tamron 28-75 to replace my kit lens on my 350D. Absolutely loved it and kept it for 18 months. Only reason to change was the need for faster focussing which I have with my 24-70 L .

Otherwise, a very capable lens and offers a lot for the money.
 
HybridUK said:
I'm just not sure if i should just save up more and go for the Canon 24-105mm F4L?

I'm really confuzled at the moment for which route to go down.
Click to expand...

Do you need the larger aperture in low light conditions? That will probably be one deciding factor with that 24-105. Its the reason I chose the 24-70 over the 24-105.
 
Canon Bob said:
I got my missus an EF28-135 IS for use as a general lens on her 30D. Quality seems fine and they're as cheap as chips at the moment as they've been put as kit lenses on some of the recent bodies. 200 quid should get you a secondhand unused one.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yup, I have the same lens and it's great - I recommend it as a walkabout lens.

The focussing is fast and quiet thanks to the USM and image stabilization comes in handy too. Gimmicks aside, it produces nice, crisp images. :)
 
I do shoot a few school productions, music events etc. in low light so sometimes it's useful to have 2.8. But then again, I have my nifty fifty to fall back on...

Maybe that falls back to the Tamron for the time being then?
 
The Sigma is lovely, but is only f/2.8 for about 2mm. For the money, I'd choose it or the Tamron 17-50mm which is a constant f/2.8. On a crop body like the 400D, a 24- or a 28- may leave you wanting more at the wide end.
 
Thanks for the sound advice Marky and you make perfect sense.

The only problem i have with Tamron is reading up some people say that if the lens is too soft it needs to go off for calibration. Are there any places in the UK that do the calibration or does it need sending off overseas?
 
The Sigma 24-70 doesn't have any problems with lens flare any more than any other lens now. I have shot quite a few photos with the sun directly in front of me and have only had an occasional small flare in some pictures. :)
 
Canon Bob said:
I got my missus an EF28-135 IS for use as a general lens on her 30D. Quality seems fine and they're as cheap as chips at the moment as they've been put as kit lenses on some of the recent bodies. 200 quid should get you a secondhand unused one.

Bob
Click to expand...

I agree, its a great walkabout lens, I recently sold mine to replace it with a 24-70mm L but miss the 28-135mm for walkies !
 
How about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 ? I've got one and I'm very happy with it. Nice and solid, good in low light, and quite sharp. Only downside is slightly noisy focus. I think you can probably get one for close to £250 if you shop around (eg, warehouse express).

I'd be wary of the Sigma 17-70. My brother had one and had severe focussing issues on a canon 400d (sent it back). Similar reports on the internet also.

Jeff
 
I use the sigma 17-70 for my normal walk about lens.
Never any probs with it.
 
I've just bought the Sigma 17-70mm as my walkabout lens, not had a chance to get out with it yet tho.

For slightly over your budget you could get the Sigma 17-70mm and a "nifty fifty" from Kerso!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top