Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 26, 2013, 8:40 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default 700D kit lens alternative

So after much deliberating I've decided to get a 700D or maybe compromise on a 600/650 if I need to save a bit for a better lens.

So now I am consideringdo I go with the USM IS kit lens... 18-55 or 18-135 or something else.

I've been on lens hero and looked for lenses with a f2.8 (the kit is 3.5 - 5.6) for a faster lens and better depth of field.

Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD Canon-ef
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM Canon-ef
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM Canon-ef
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM Canon-ef

Which of these is best in terms of offering a better image quality and comparable/better auto focus speed?

I'm also considering the more expensive
Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
which is a similar speed although wider and a bit longer and gives me the 24mm I'm used to for landscape with my point and shoot.

the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM also gets great reviews but is a bit out my price range. Are there any good UK refurb websites? I was looking at Wex for a new.


So in summary I'm looking for a fast(ish) lens that is a good all rounder travel / zoom lens and would look to invest in a wide angle and a telephoto in the next 12 months so if it was 18-55mm it isn;t the end of the world but if I could eek a little more out that would be good.

e.g. I was thinking this kind of lengths / apertures in the future
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DX Canon-ef
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM Canon-ef
Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD Macro Canon-ef
daninmanchester is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 27, 2013, 5:01 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

I would suggest you look at the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 XR SP AF IF lens which is the older version of the VC version you mentioned in your post. That and the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 are two good lens choices.

The Tamron VC version does not perform as well, wide open, as the older version 17-50mm f2.8. I have the older version and find it to be extremely sharp, which is the whole point of getting a fast lens.

The Tokina11-16mm F2.8 lens is a great wide angle lens as I too, have the 11-16mm, but find that I don't use it nearly as much because, for panoramas, I take a series of 3 to 4 photos panning the landscape with the 17-50mm, then take them and stitch them together in photoshop, etc. You can get better results and print a pano much larger that way. I would suggest you save your money to get a lens with a longer focal range.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 5:22 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

I agree with Zig. If you can do without the image stabilization, the unstabilized Tamron 17-50/2.8 runs rings around the other lenses you mentioned, and is on par with the Canon 17-55/2.8. If you can't do without the image stabilization, any of the Sigmas do well, and each has it's advantages. The 18-50/2.8-4.5 is slightly faster, has less CA and is about as sharp as the Canon kit 18-55 lens, the 17-50/2.8 is a lot faster and the 17-70/2.8-4 has a longer zoom range.

The Canon 15-85 is also an excellent lens, but it won't help you with your depth of field issue.

BTW, Canon's USM and Sigma's HSM should outperform the Tamron lenses you mentioned as far as AF speed is concerned.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 2:50 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

Thanks, really useful advice. I had a similar thought RE the panoramic shots, but then I thought I'd like to use it on holiday, sunset seascapes, longer exposures, etc.

I don't really know a lot about image stabilization. I guess if I'm shooting hand held it really helps and especially so with video? A lot of the time even with my point and shoot I've always tried to use at least a Joby. My colleague recommended a mono pole gives a good few stops of IS.

The 15-85 is just something I thought gave me a good focal length range. if it were a bit faster it would probably be my lens of choice 90% of the time.

If I wanted to experiment with video would the sigma 17-50/2.8 be the better choice?
daninmanchester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 27, 2013, 6:26 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daninmanchester View Post
The 15-85 is just something I thought gave me a good focal length range. if it were a bit faster it would probably be my lens of choice 90% of the time.
If it were a bit faster it would probably be EVERYBODY'S lens of choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daninmanchester View Post
If I wanted to experiment with video would the sigma 17-50/2.8 be the better choice?
HSM is a good choice for video, but the longer zoom range of the 17-70 would probably be better. ... speaking just for the video.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2013, 2:10 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
wave01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North West England
Posts: 1,748
Default

my 2cents i have the sigma 17-70os and its a fine lens, coupled with my 70-200Lis f4 these 2 lenses go every where with me. if you are looking at lenses and bodies go try them out see how they feel and dont settle for i will get used to it.
wave01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2013, 8:41 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

Interesting...Well the Sigma 17-70mm is faster than the kit lens.

Obviously 2.8 throughout the range will give me more control over DoF, but to what extent?

How does the Sigmas f4 at 50-70mm compare to
- f5.6 on lenses that are 50mm?
- f2.8 on lenses that are 50mm?


Should I compromise focal length for wider aperture?

I guess it's a subjective matter based on usage unless you deal only on technical merit.

So far I have used a cannon point and shoot with CDHK and done mostly landscape and architecture with a bit of portrait. I guess that is why the 15mm appealed to me as it will give me the same equivalent width (24mm) that I知 used to. But I would happily buy a Tokina 11-16mm to give me some new possibilities here.

I知 keen to explore more in particular nice DoF/Bokeh of features, longer exposures and night scenes, etc. and I知 sure I値l discover plenty more. I知 almost certain I will end up with 3 lenses over the next year.
daninmanchester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2013, 7:09 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

I found this which is a nice comparison of the lenses in question and provides sample images.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx

Having seen this, in particular the sample shots, all the Sigmas worry me as does the Tamron with IS.

The best for price is clearly the Tamron (without IS) looking at the sample pictures.

Canon still has the edge if I can find the money and need IS for video.
daninmanchester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2013, 7:14 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

The unstabilized Tamron 17-50/2.8 is a very good lens, and for the price, it's extraordinary. But optical image stabilization adds complexity to the optical design, so the stabilized Tamron 17-50/2.8 isn't as good. Also, given the results of objective testing of other Tamron lenses, Tamron's Vibration Compensation only provides a stop or two of benefit anyway, so IS vs. IQ tradeoff probably isn't a good one.

The Sigma's aren't as good as the unstabilized Tamron, but they're better than the stabilized one, and objective test results for Sigma's Optical Stabilizer lenses shows a two to four stop benefit, so the IS vs. IQ tradeoff is a little more palatable.

And again, I'll point out that, for movies, Canon's USM and Sigma's HSM lenses are quieter than the unstabilized Tamron.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2013, 1:38 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 14
Default

Thanks.

So having looked at some videos with IS on and off it is clear for video it is essential if you are hand held and I'm guessing that the compromise at the edges of the pictures wont matter too much if I crop or I'm not printing.

Is it safe to assume all these lenses are an upgrade to the kit?
daninmanchester 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 10:16 PM.