BEST NON-CANON LENS?

[Steve Parr]

My next purchase is going to be the 17-40mm L.

Assuming I don't get bitten by the L glass bug, and decide to look at other manufacturers, which is best? Which has the most consistent track record for quality solid build, excellent optics, and general overall customer satisfaction?

I see Sigma mentioned a lot...

Thanks!

[DSMITH131]

i think you made a typo 14-70mm but assuming you mean 17-40 L from what i have read you cant beat it for the money but on the cheaper side sigma seem to have some good glass in this range

[Steve Parr]

i think you made a typo 14-70mm but assuming you mean 17-40 L

Man, I've gotta' watch these typos.

Nice catch, man, thanks...

Steve

[Harry Settle]

Sigma 24-70 2.8
Tamron 28-75 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8
Not mentioned often, if ever, Tamron 19-35 3.5-4.5, mine is very sharp.

[eosster]

Assuming I don't get bitten by the L glass bug,


You will, if you hang around here too much, LOL.

[CyberDyneSystems]

If you look at the Tokina, Tamron, Pheonix and Sigma lines,. you'll find that though the others may have a small handfull of decent lenses,. Sigma has by far the most to offer. I can think of about three nearly consistantly good Tamron models,.

Sigma has at least a dozen very high quality offerings.
And ONLY Sigma offers a focus motor that can come close to comparing to Canon and Nikon for AF speed and low noise.

[roanjohn]

If you get the other brands........then you'll always be thinking about the Canon L.

BUT,

......if you get the Canon.........I betcha won't be thinking about the other brands.

:-)

Just my messed up philosophy in lenses..........

Ro1

[Andy_T]

Hehe ... exception to that rule might be the Sigma 120-300/2.8 EX.

But then, it is the most expensive zoom lens for the Canon EOS system :shock:

Best regards,
Andy

[griff2]

roanjohn wrote: If you get the other brands........then you'll always be thinking about the Canon L.

BUT,

......if you get the Canon.........I betcha won't be thinking about the other brands.

:)

Just my messed up philosophy in lenses..........
So true..:mrgreen:

[KevC]

If you get the other brands........then you'll always be thinking about the Canon L.

BUT,

......if you get the Canon.........I betcha won't be thinking about the other brands.

:-)

Just my messed up philosophy in lenses..........

Ro1

Till you catch the Z virus.....

.... I should keep my mouth shut ;)

The 17-40L is a very *VERY* value priced L. I don't mean it's low quality, it's far from that. Awesome lens. However, I believe you should reconsider. As people above say, you may catch the L virus :)

You already have the kit lens. That goes down way to 18mm. Yes, 17 < 18 but are you worried about that 1mm? The kit lens is pretty good stopped down to about f/8. I've been using the kit lens almost exclusively since I got my flash.

Instead, buy the Tamron 28-75/2.8. It's a direct competitor to the 24-70L which costs much *MUCH* more.

But then again, the 17-40L is an awesome price piece of glass, just like the 70-200L. Good luck!

[rdenney]

If you get the other brands........then you'll always be thinking about the Canon L.

BUT,

......if you get the Canon.........I betcha won't be thinking about the other brands.



You won't be able to. Your brain will be befuddled by hunger, because you won't be able to afford food.

I bought the Sigma wide zoom because it was wide enough to give me the range I wanted with the small sensor, and my 10D won't accept the 10-22 EF-S. Canon has nothing else to compete with the Sigma 12-24. All my other Sigma lenses are leftovers from my film days, when 35mm was "just for fun" and I did real work in medium format. But I'm quite happy with this particular lens, and I think it's quite good enough for reasonably critical work if one takes into account just how extreme it is (for a lens that covers the 24x36 frame).

With that Sigma lens in the bag, the Canon 20-35 is a good middle lens that works well. It's fractionally not as good wide open, but it's good enough for what I do.

I always lusted after the old 17-35 before the 10D. It's ironic that now that the 17-40 has come out in a more affordable range, I find that I don't really need it--it's too much in the middle focal length for the small sensor.

Rick "whose only L is the 70-200" Denney

[Anders Östberg]

As with all manufacturers you need to pick the good ones from their long lists of products.
Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Canon all have some good and some not so good lenses in their lineups.
Personally I have had fewer problems with Canon than with either Tamron or Sigma, and have replaced all non-Canon lenses except for a Sigma 12-24 where there's no alternative.

[Andy_T]

It's the same as with every other product.

Generally, I prefer BMW over Chevrolet.
However, if somebody offered to trade a Corvette for my BMW 316, I would be more than willing to swap :lol:

Best regards,
Andy