Wich Lens out of this Sigma or Canon

[05Xrunner]

After I get my 70-200f4L I am thinking of getting one of these. not sure
the Canon 28-135 IS
or the Sigma 24-135 f2.8-4.5

Would the sigma be about the same cause of it being a faster lens and not needing the IS.
plus its around $100 cheaper

[LightRules]

Get the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 EX DG Macro. Better optically and build-wise than both your options.

[chris clements]

I agree.
You don't need an overlap, and the Sigma 24-70 2.8 (or the Tamron equivalent- not much between the 2) bests your shortlist on build, light-gathering and optical performance.

[MrChad]

The Sigma will likely be a lot like your 35-105mm only with a bit more reach and wide view, how do you like that lens, is it fast enough for you?

Like wise the Canon will perform for simaliar focal length like your 35-105, would adding IS to that lens help you much?

The new Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 DC may pair even better with your 70-200mm f4. I know that I really appreciate the wider end of my zooms on the Rebel-D APS-C sensor.

Another option might be to look into the 17-85mm IS USM EF-S.

You need to remember that variable aperture lenses don't usually stay at the fast aperture very long. The Sigma 24-135 may only be f2.8 at 24mm.

[WildWolf]

I personally like having overlapping lenses. I have the 28-135 IS. It is a fine lens and I would trust it over the Sigma. PLUS you get IS which saved me many times from carrying a tripod. You also get USM with the Canon- much faster AF than the Sigma. My $0.02

I am currently selling my mint 28-135 iS to fund the purchase of my first "L" lens. Let me know if you are interested.

[05Xrunner]

thanks. I am not really sure on that Canon I have. Its about 15years old. Got it with the old EOS 650. its pretty slow focus and loud. I guess it doesnt do to bad for being an out of date lens.
I would like to get rid of it and get some fresh new and better quality lens

[zacker]

i have the siggi 24 70 ex dg macro and the canon 28-135 IS.. the IS is on my camera constantly. the siggie is sitting in its box.. its nice but no IS...
-zacker-

[jjonsalt]

A 24/28-70/75/80 f/2.8 would be the way I advise. Also, once you have your 70-200L f/4 sell the Tamron 70-300 and get Canon's 1.4xTC.

[05Xrunner]

I tried to sell my 70-300 in the marketplace. No one wanted it.
I just sold my Tamron TC 1.4x
I never ever used it.

[jjonsalt]

I just sold my Tamron TC 1.4x
I never ever used it.

You will with the 70-200L.

[ed rader]

I personally like having overlapping lenses. I have the 28-135 IS. It is a fine lens and I would trust it over the Sigma. PLUS you get IS which saved me many times from carrying a tripod. You also get USM with the Canon- much faster AF than the Sigma. My $0.02

I am currently selling my mint 28-135 iS to fund the purchase of my first "L" lens. Let me know if you are interested.

i agree. overlap is good....especially on your mid-range zoom, which many of us use as a walkaround.

i think there is too much emphasis on "covering the range" and not enough on the individual merits on a lens.

it's funny that some would criticize overlap and suggest a shorter lens, and we are talking about a single lens either way!

and when you are talking about two lenses and one has more reach i believe the xtra reach is an asset, not a liabilty.

anyhow...that's my take.

and since the OP offered two choices and didn't really ask for other suggestions i'd say go with the canon.

ed rader