Canon vs Sigma vs Tamron - Please help

[vimerla]

Guys

I need your help once again. Fortunatley, I have been given the opportunity to shoot a wedding as a second photographer. In fact, I was attending a local photographers meeting and during break, one of these photographers offered me to accompany him and shoot a wedding with him. I think that this is one great opportunity not to be missed.

At the moment, I only have a 20d, 17-55mm kit lens, 50mm f/1.8 II and the 580ex and I was thinking of buying a new lens to use during such occasions. In our local community, we are allowed to use flash, even in churches.

Since my budget is limited, I cannot go for the Canon 24-70L, but I was thinking of the Canon ef-s 17-85, Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 or Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.

All of these three have their problems.

1 - the canon is only usable on the 20d (cannot be used on full framed cameras) and it's not f/2.8

2 - there are problems with the sigma on the 20d (at least tht's what i reead)

3 - the tamron is very difficult to find (I don't want to buy used lenses)

With all these challenges, which one do you suggest? I don't want to miss this chance.

tia
vim

[condyk]

2 - there are problems with the sigma on the 20d (at least tht's what i reead)


The new lens has only been available a short time! I assume you are talking about the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG Macro There are other variations which are older. However, there seems to have been an issue related to flash on early copies. Latest copies should be fine. See here:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/247496

[blue_max]

The new lens has only been available a short time! I assume you are talking about the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG Macro There are other variations which are older. However, there seems to have been an issue related to flash on early copies. Latest copies should be fine. See here:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/247496


Good to see you back Dave,

I thought of you when I read the post. Glad you've still got your finger on the pulse!

Graham

[spud159]

I found the Canon 28-135 IS quite a good option....

[condyk]

I found the Canon 28-135 IS quite a good option....

That's exactly what I thought about mine too ... which is why I sold it and got the Tamron within a week :lol: :lol:

The IS is a good and practical walk around lens, but for me at least it just lacks that bite I need in my shots: strong colour, a real 3d feel to the image and crisp contrast. I wanted to like it, but didn't! Horses for courses.

I'm very tempted to get this lens as a replacement for my ex Tamron. Here are some user views:

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_332057_3128crx.aspx

Graham, thanks for the kind welcome back :D

[vimerla]

any more feedback please? still not sure which one to buy.

regards
vim

[RikWriter]

Have you tried the Sigma 24-60 2.8? I have one and it's a great lens so far.

[lost]

I have the 24-70 EX DG MACRO. I have only one complaint, no HSM. It is a wonderful lens, I have not tried the Tamron but can imagine that it could be better. I have seen a lot of review comparing it to the 24-70L and for a $400 lens to even come close is amazing, let alone actually hold its own against a lens thats 3 times the price.

[Sathi]

I have the tamron 28-75 on my 20d and love it. Fantastic sharp pictures. Great Bokeh. A friend of mine has the sigma on her 10d and the pictures off it also look really good. However, I didn't like the weight and zoom action of the sigma. Compared to the tamron the zoom feels heavy and clunky. It is also twice the size of the tamron for what seems to be very similiar performance between the two. The focus also seems noticably faster on the tamron, but I suspect that has more to do with me using a 20d as opposed to her 10d. Filters for the tamron are also much much cheaper than the sigma.

[AjP]

for weddings you definately need to have 2.8, never know what kinda light condition u will have, if its outside wedding then no prob, u can use anyting, but if it inside with poor light, dark room, etc.... with lense 3.5-5.6 will be slow to focus. I did few weddings with 28-135, it is not too bad, unless room is small and you need really good wide angle, other then that 28-135 is good for starters u can check some of mine pics (http://ajp-photo.com/gallery/) I did with that lense.
but for close future I'm definately getting at least 16-35 2.8L and 24-70 2.8L

[Sailare]

Check out the tokina 24-200 as a less expensive, but wider range and very sharp alternative.
Rebate is on now so your net on this is $ 269 from B& H. Buy yourself some extra flash cards with the extra money and shoot in raw. For about 50% more the 28-135 IS would be my next choice.

The 20D has low noise at higher settings and you do have the 580Ex.

[vimerla]

thanks for sharing your views. much appreciated.