Best lens for a EOS 350D

[Barrykap]

I just bought the standard EOS 350D 'kit' which contained the 18-55 standard lens. Unfortunately I think this lens is cra.... not very good. Not at all as sharp as I need. So I am looking for a reasonably priced 'better' lens which must have good sharpness. I am not TOO bothered about wide-angle as I shoot mainly medium distance subjects so really I would accept most ranges of zooms. My budget however, is limited due to just splashing out for the kit. I would pay up to a max of £300 for a lens that will serve me well initially.

I have browsed only on internet and have not tried any out but seems the Sigmas 24-70 and 28-70 might be OK as would the Tamron 28-75. What does anyone think? I also saw the Tamron 28-300 at just over £200 and was surprised at how small it is. One consideration is I don't want to have a monster attached to my camera as I'm only a small feller :-)

Any suggestions? Thanks in advance.

[condyk]

You've spotted my own standard recommendations already. Best price for the Sigma at the moment seems to be Jessops, which is very unusual. I would opt for that just for more at the wide end and build is good. fstopjojo did an interesting test against the more expensive Canon L equivelent and it came out very well indeed. Do a search on his name to find it.

The Tamron I liked when I had it and thumbs up especially for the light walkaround practicality and image quality. Another popular option is the 28-135mm IS from Canon. I had this too and didn't take to it, but many owners get good results and the length and image stabilization may make it a really good choice. Very popular walkaround and not too heavy.

I think the Tamron 28-300 scored well in a recent magazine test and it is certainly a very flexible range. Another option that seems to be well liked is the Sigma 18-200mm, but I have no experience of this one personally. I would go for the Sigma or the shorter range 2.8 Tamron myself as I suspect they are the better quality overall and you get the flexibility of f2.8. You can keep either in your collection long term and they won't be embarassed if you add better lenses at the wide and long ends.

Because the 350 is a small camera I would probably go for the Tamron for balance reasons myself. The Battery grip makes handling easier and more secure in my opinion and so makes a bit of a heavier lens, like the SIgma, more comfy to use. Personal preference tho'. For longer lenses it's probably essential.

[Barrykap]

Thanks Condyk,

Good to know I am on the right track at least with my short-list!

After reading more comments it seems a straight choice now between the Sigma 24-70 and the Tamron 28-75.

Giving that my real concern is to get the best overall sharpness which would you go for from these two?

I also read that the AF on the Tamron is a bit slow, but as I normally use One-shot focussing I presume this won't be as bad a problem as using AI focussing where the lens is moving constantly?

Intersestingly Jessops do the cheapest Sigma but the dearest Tamron! (about £350)

Cheers.

[RikWriter]

My reccomendation right now would be the Sigma 24-60 f2.8. Very nice, light, sharp little lens, much smaller than the Sigma 24-70 or the Tamron 28-75.

I took these with it:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v260/RikWriter/BoeingMuseumofFlightCorsairsmall.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v260/RikWriter/BoeingMuseumofFlightF14NoseOnsmall.jpg

[condyk]

http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/lenstests

Have a look at the above tests.

Many, many people love the Tamron and I was happy with mine too, so it's a safe bet. You can get it for £249 plus P&P via www.microglobe.co.uk who are prompt and seem a good outfit.

I would go for the Sigma for no reason other than for a change :) When I was researching I could find no logical reason to choose one over the other, bith have their pro's and con's, and I finally bought the Tamron just so I could the say I had a Sigma, Canon, Tokina and Tamron in my collection :lol: :lol: It was also a tad cheaper.

It's worth think about what ranges you shoot. One thing I discovered is that I normally shoot either 20-50mm range or 250-420mm. 50-250mm is essentially wasted on me 95% of the time, though I do have my 105mm MAcro which can do super sharp portraits should I need to!

I'm therefore rationalising around my real use so I can travel lighter. I'm opting for the 18-50mm 2.8 Sigma to replace two lenses, a 20-35 Tokina and my ex 28-75 Tamron. That gives me all Sigma's, but purely by coincidence: now people will think I'm biased towards Sigma even more ... just not the case at all. Just the best performance, build and value I have found for what I need. I'm still tempted by that 24-70mm Sigma tho' ... but the 18-50mm 2.8 is lighter and wider, so ideal for me.

The 20-60mm 2.8 looks a nice sharp contrasy lens too judging from the shots about. Seems to lose on the wide end and not add anything at the longer ends though, at least for my needs. Good walkarounjd lens for sure. Worth checking out. I don't know it very well.

[lensmen]

If $$$ is no objection, then all the "L" lenses in that family are GOOD stuff.

Again, it depends on your needs and if the $$ are available.

[Barrykap]

Thanks to everyone for their comments.

Hearing of other lens upset the cart a little now!

The 20-60 just might not be big enough at the top end really as I do a little bit of portraiture (not a lot mind). So I think I would need the extra 'top end' rather than 'bottom end'. I would use this lens as my 'general-purpose' and in the future would probably get a couple of fixed low and high lens for specialising.

Re the Sigmas (24-70 and 28-70). I think the 24 just might be too big in size for what I need as I say I'm a little fella and just want to walk around without stumbling over a big contraption dangling on my belly all the time!

The 24-70 seems enormous compared to the 28 and I read somewhere the 28 has the edge on sharpness.

So at the moment this is favourite.

Thanks again.

[EOSAddict]

I have the Tamron 28-300 and if you want all bases covered in one lens it is great. Image quality is very good considering its range so long as you stop down and don't look too hard at the edges! Sigma do 18-200, 18-125 and 28-300 but I dpn;t know anything about the quality of these lenses...

[Carzee]

Start with the Canon 50mm......which is what it should be sold with.

[uumode]

Try the kit lens with the incamera settings of +2 sharpness, +2 contrast, 0 saturation

When I got the kit lens, the results blew me away as I was expecting rubbish output. It was originally destined for ebay, but I've kept it for 'macro' shots.

(All images are JPEGs out of camera, no post processing)
http://www.wan.st/public/18-55mm_MkII/
But sharpness is subjective of course, so others may think these are soft.

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 or a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 which is a very compact lens. Both are sharper than the kit lens.

[Barrykap]

Still confused! :-)

But have gone for the 28-70 Sigma..... for now.

At least it is cheap (I can get it for just over £200) and small and the sharpness is reportedly better than the others.

If it doesn't suit, no great loss really. I can eBay it and go for another. I think you have to be prepared to lose a little in settling on the exact one for you but once it IS settled it will probably last you a lifetime don't you think?

I am not keen on adjusting the camera settings to try and get the kit lens to cope. That is not ideal solution and I want to use raw format in a neutral capture.

I'll report back my initial experiences when I get it.

Thanks again for the help.

[EOSAddict]

barrykap,

let us know how you get on... I am debating Sigma 24-70, 28-70 and 18-50!!

[Barrykap]

Hi all,

I got the Sigma 28-70 and am pleased with it. It is much sharper than the 'kit' lens and while being a little bigger and heavier it also seems to have a much better balance with the camera. I have only taken a few shots yet but I am quite pleased with the image quality.

Thanks for all your help. I will be looking for a reasonably priced wide angle next I think.

Here are a couple of quick shots using the Sigma lens which I took at our local Steam railway Centre.

http://biddulph2004.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/images/foxfield5.jpg

http://biddulph2004.mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/images/foxfield6.jpg

[condyk]

Yes, the older 28-70 is a safe lens to buy judging from the user feedback I have read. If I could get a cheapo via ebay I would. The 18-50 2.8 might have suited you better in retrospect tho' now you're also after a bit more wide angle. Costs £300 and in short supply at the moment, but be cheaper and more practical than buying the two together. Glad you're happy with your choice anyway :D