Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 1, 2007, 8:04 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Default

I'm looking for a good all round travel lens of my Canon Xti.

Here is what I have in mind:
Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG
Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF]

Which would you recomend?
Is there a mib difference between these regardgin sharpness and such? (Disregarding the obviouse differenses).

Recomend anything else?
Like I said, I'm looking for a good travel lend. I'm rather picky on sharpenss and good image quality and am willing to spend around $300-400 for a good lens.

P.s.: Where can I buy used lenses? (other than at B&H).
skuliaxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 2, 2007, 10:20 AM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 47
Default

I am not too familiar with the lenses you are describing, as I personally have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Di II.

But I do know adorama also has some used lenses now and again.
Buhammot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 10:29 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Unless you want to upgrade to a full-frame camera in the future, it's a universal fact that a smaller 'digital' only lens is always better than a larger full-frame lens designed for film - The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is definetly better for your XTi

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 1:50 PM   #4
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Unless you want to upgrade to a full-frame camera in the future, it's a universal fact that a smaller 'digital' only lens is always better than a larger full-frame lens designed for film
Maybe just a nit, but I would say it's a generally accepted fact that smaller 'digital only' lenses are SHARPER than full-frame lenses. Build quality on some of the pro lenses (L lenses from Canon and EX lenses from sigma) is often better. I happen to like metal construction in my lenses. And, maybe focus speed is important to people as well. So, a user could validly choose a less sharp full frame lens because it's built better and has a better focus motor.

For this particular case neither comes into play. But in the global sense I don't necessarily agree digital lenses are BETTER. They're just SHARPER. I don't think you can globally say that they're better. Just my opinion
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 3:42 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Agree

Although the Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG is not as well built as the 24-70mm f/2.8 (which is built like a tank) - This 24-60 does not have HSM either so in this regards the Tamron is way better in sharpness!!!

Actually the MTF of the 24-60mm f2.8 EX DG really stink... :?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 8:24 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 33
Default

OK, thanks for all the input.
I guess I will go with the Tamron AF 17-50mm then. If I can afford it :!:

I was hoping to find it somewhere used. No luck yet.
Is there no Sell/Buy/Trade section here at Steves? (I couldn't find it, but such threads are sometimes locked until a user has a X number of posts).

P.s.: Last but not least, what does HSM and MTF stand for. Couldn't find anything with google.


skuliaxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2007, 9:39 PM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

skuliaxe wrote:
Quote:
P.s.: Last but not least, what does HSM and MTF stand for. Couldn't find anything with google.
HSM: http://sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses.asp#hsm
MTF: http://photozone.de/3Technology/mtf.htm
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2007, 2:09 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
elduderino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 114
Default

I didn't know there was a Sigma 24-60mm, only thought there was a 24-70mm.

But anyways, I would go with the Tamron 17-50mm. From what I've read, it's a fantastic lens, really sharp, and a bargain at around $400.
elduderino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2007, 11:33 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

the lens is good right from wide open at f2.8. For landscapes the lens resolves as much as possible at f11.

the only issue i found was the noisy AF. But thats not an issue for a great quality lens. If u shoot manual its not even an issue.

At 17mm the lens is better than most of the 17mm lens at this level. Build is very decent. Not at all plastic.

between 24-60 and 17-50, the 17-50 is a better choice. Wider, faster and sharper. I have used this lens with my old 20D. Great lens..
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2007, 6:45 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 188
Default

The going rate for the Tamron 17-50 is about $429 delivered. There is a whopping $10 dollar rebate
anthlover is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:26 PM.