Fill gap between 17-40 and 70-200

[jnevin]

I need a high quality lens to replace the Canon 24-85f3.5 (light but flimsy) for my 10D.
I know that the most popular options seem to be the Canon 24-70L (expensive, heavy), the Tamron 28-75 (different layout to Canon, hard to find), Sigma 24-80 (large filters, heavy).
Has anyone tried the newer Sigma 28-70 EX (67mm filters, light weight)? This appears to be a good match for the 17-40L and 70-200L which I already have. Test reports seem scarce on this lens. From the Sigma website it appears to be very similar to the highly praised 24-70.
I'd be grateful for any comments.
BTW I'm an amateur interested mainly in family pictures,travel and landscapes.

[psk4363]

As you already have the superb 17-40 and 70-200 lenses, keep them both and fill the gap with either a 50mm f1.8, or f1.4 or even the 50/60mm Canon macro lens (which would complement your landscape work). Why are you considering another zoom which will duplicate certain focal lengths of your zooms?

Barry

[jnevin]

You have point, but that zone between 40 and 70 is often appropriate for small groups and portraits...a zoom with a large aperture would be useful. But I'm also considering other options similar to those you mentioned...50/1.4, 100/2.8 macro etc.
Thanks for the advice,
James.

[jnevin]

Sorry, should have emphasised that both zooms are f4!

[Persian-Rice]

Get a nifty fify, cheap and will do more then enough.

[KevC]

I'm with Persian-Rice. Maybe you need a prime. 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 :)

[jnevin]

Opinion so far is clearly on the side of the primes. I'll check out a few of the options. I think aiming for an eventual combination of the 50f1.4 and 10f2.8 macro would a flexible solution for portraits, lansdscapes and close-ups. The wide apertures are a particular concern as both my current zooms are f4. I'd be grateful for any further advice. Thanks for the replies.

[blue_max]

I have the 17-40 and 70-200 f4 lenses and am considering the Canon 24-70. The main reason being that yes, there is overlap, but it is of a higher speed and suits the general purpose category very well. My main use of the wide angle is architecture and scenes, where the 24-70 would be my point and shoot lens if I can call it that.

The range of 24-70 is very much the general purpose area and of a reasonably high speed and excellent quality. The Tamron 28-75 gets reviews as the main competitor with a much more reasonable price tag.

Primes are ok and I am looking to move more into them, but they require planning. For grabbed family pictures, zooms are great. I have a 85mm prime, but will only move to it where the family are in a confined space or in low light. It's horses for courses, but I need something in the 50mm area and feel a 24-70 would stay on the camera more. Eventually I will buy a 135mm prime plus 1.4x extender and retire the 70-200, but for now I am covered.

It really helps to use the lenses you have as much as possible and bear these issues in mind to evaluate your needs.

It's like clothes, everybody has different needs.

Graham

[Mike Kreger]

Your looking for same lens as I. Need something between my 15-30 and 120-300. Stuck between cannons 24-70L and sigmas 18-70EX. My other sigma EX lens seem to do fine, but I'm no expert.
Hope to compair in store befor purchase.

[Mike Kreger]

Adorama special Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX $275. Helped my decision out a bit.

[Leorooster]

I was in the same position as you guys. I decided to go with the 50/1.4 which I am very happy with. The 50/1.4 is a superb prime and in my opinion it's very good for both portraits and landscapes. However, if you don't already own a macro lens, consider the 50/2.5 macro which will give you more flexibility.

[blinking8s]

50 1.4 and/or 85 1.8

my two favorite lenses...

[csnudelman]

As you already have the superb 17-40 and 70-200 lenses, keep them both and fill the gap with either a 50mm f1.8, or f1.4 or even the 50/60mm Canon macro lens (which would complement your landscape work). Why are you considering another zoom which will duplicate certain focal lengths of your zooms?

Barry

I find overlapping focal lengths of zoom lenses nice. Example, the 17-40L f/4 and the 24-70L f/2.8. I find myself in certain situations where I want the range and don't wish to change lenses when I do. Why not the 16-35L f/2.8 instead of the 17-40L? Better but too expensive for me.

[GTogs]

I filled the gap with the Tamron 28-75 since I wanted a faster lens than what I had before I bought the 17-40 and 70-200! I really like my 28-75, it makes for a great walk around lens, reasonably fast and very sharp!

[blinking8s]

i personally like the 17-40 more than the 16-35...i just dont like being stuck at f4 in crummy light

[ed rader]

>>Opinion so far is clearly on the side of the primes. I'll check out a few of the options. I think aiming for an eventual combination of the 50f1.4 and 10f2.8 macro would a flexible solution for portraits, lansdscapes and close-ups. The wide apertures are a particular concern as both my current zooms are f4. I'd be grateful for any further advice. Thanks for the replies.<<

i'd fill the gap with a fast zoom. i like overlap between lenses which is not to be confused with redundacy. without overlap i find that i need to change lenses too frequently.

a mid-range zoom that begins at 24mm is ideal for me but that narrows it down to sigma or the canon if you want a fast lens. i'd probably get the tamron and make due :).

primes are fine too but i'd rather have the flexibilty of a fast zoom in the mid range.

ed rader

[xuxu1]

If i were you... then i´d go for the Canon 24-70L.
But you are not me. ;)

Regards
ED