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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 17, 2005, 4:46 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3
Default

I'm just about to purchase a 20d and, like so many others, trying to figure out what the best lens would be. As a startout lens, I'm looking for a fair quality walk-around lens that allows the image quality of the 20d to shine through. I figure I can always upgrade to higher-quality (f/2.8 or L) glass later on.

At first, I was charmed by the canon 17-85 IS. Yet after browsing through this and similar forums, the additional zoom range and price differentialof the sigma 18-125 seems mighty attractive.

I'm fully aware of the absence of IS in the sigma, but I figure that the IS only reduces camera shake and not subject movement and, well, is not worth the+/- $ 300 price difference and the zoom trade-off.

The main question is, thus, whether both lenses are in the same league quality-wise or whether the sharpness of the 17-85 IS justifies the trade-offs vis-*-vis the sigma. I hope some of you own both lenses and can compare.

Much obliged for helping out a beginning Dslr enthousiast :-):-):-)


Taxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 17, 2005, 9:14 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

There was a long thread on this subject already: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...24&forum_id=65

... also FYI: http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/shootout
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 2:49 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3
Default

Thank you, but I'd read that thread prior to posting the question:idea:. It seems there is a lot of disagreement on the image quality issue.

Additionally, I picked up in other threads that there might be focusing problems with the sigma (slow and front focus) and that beyond 85mm, the sigma only works well in MF.Any thoughts on that?
Taxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 7:28 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

IMO you should get the EF 17-85 IS USM for the extra $300 and have the peace of mind, but you can't go wrong with either
If you're happy with the saving and extra range, go for it - but if you have strong doubt, it will never go away...

There's also several things you should know:
1. The camera does the autofocus and not the lens
2. Regardless of how much you pay for a lens you never get 100% sucess rate (check some older postings with front/back focus with 'L' glass)
3. A photographer's skill has more to do with the quality of the output than any lens regardless of cost! :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 18, 2005, 6:10 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3
Default

Quote:
IMO you should get the EF 17-85 IS USM for the extra $300 and have the peace of mind, but you can't go wrong with either
I finally did go for the 17-85. Naturally, the photographer's skills are the most important factor, but there is nothing wrong in trying to find the best bang for the buck.

Well, since the 20d kit + 50 f/1.8 is arriving on friday, I'll start taking pics as of the weekend and stop worryingover the technical details. I'll let you know my findings, though.


Taxy 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 7:44 PM.