Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Sep 2011 (Tuesday) 22:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Little confused on picking lenses, can I get some help?

 
JDM555
Senior Member
Avatar
264 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Sep 20, 2011 22:16 |  #1

Hey guys. I know there are many threads on "what lens should I get" or "which is better", but after doing research and looking around, I'm kind of at a dead end.

I want a wide angle lens for sure, and a replacement for the kit lens. So far, the sigma 10-20mm or Tokina 11-16mm are the top 2 depending on what I pick for the replacement kit lens.

Now, here is where I'm confused.

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 or Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Macro or Tamron 24-75mm f/2.8


If I get the 17/18-50 lens, I'll go with the 11-16 tokina, but if I get the 24-70/75, I'll go with the Sigma 10-20mm. The Sigma/Tamron replacement kit lenses are around $3-375 used, I just want to make sure I get the right one. The issue isn't about more zoom range, just want better build, IQ, and AF. Any tips?

There is a local guy selling Tamron 17-50mm in like new condition for $320 pick up, should I just go for it? I also saw Sigma 18-50mm for $350 OBO locally. So I'm pulling out my hair lol.

And I don't plan to go to FF any time soon.
Thanks


Canon T2i | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Rokinon 35 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,190 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2610
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Sep 20, 2011 22:58 |  #2

i'm not sure if the sigma 18-50f2.8 is that great...i know the new 17-50OS is a good one...but it's also a bit more than the others

are you choosing lenses based on overlap? cause a little overlap isn't really a bad thing...having a 17-50mm lens, and a 10-20mm lens isn't really going to be a bad thing...i think the first thing to figure out is if you can live with 24mm being your widest without having to switch lenses...for many that's a deal breaker


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JDM555
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
264 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Sep 20, 2011 23:15 |  #3

The Sigma 17-50 is a little out of my price range atm. I'm not choosing specifically based on overlap, I just want to buy glass that will be worth it down the line. I don't mind either size, I'm more interested in the build quality, IQ, and AF of those 4 lenses. They are all relatively even in price. I think 17-50 does sound better.

When I use to have a Sigma 70-300, I would rarely ever switch it with the nifty fifty or kit lens. I think 17-50 might be the best. Are there other 18-50, 17-50, or similar type f/2.8 lenses I should look into?


Canon T2i | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Rokinon 35 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sryinex
Member
113 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Sep 20, 2011 23:16 |  #4

Having owned a couple of the lenses you're deciding on, I can honestly say that I think you should get the Tamron 28-75 paired with the sigma 10-20. I've owned both, and yes you're missing out on the 20-28 range, but I don't think you'll miss it all that much on a crop.

The Tamron is optically very similar to higher end L lenses, you won't be disappointed at all. The 'wigma' I've owned as well. Fantastic lens on all fronts from my previous experience.

If you really wanted to save money, the Tamron 17-50 is also a great piece of glass, which I'd only get if you want to combine wide/walk around. As in, you'd skip on the ultra-wide.

Hope this helps~


5D2 300F4.0L IS 24-70L 135L 100mm f2.8 Macro 430 ex II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shutterpat
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,509 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 8051
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Orange, CA.
     
Sep 21, 2011 00:21 |  #5

OP...I tried both of these lens and ended up with the Tammy 17-50 2.8 non/vc. That's a good buy for $320. Good luck on your choices.


Follow me --> https://www.instagram.​com/shutterpat/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nikmar08
Goldmember
Avatar
1,852 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 17
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bangalore, India
     
Sep 21, 2011 00:35 |  #6

Somehow I have been prejudiced against Sigma. I use the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC and whatever people might say about the non-VC being the better of the two has not been found true by me atleast in almost any practical situation till now. I don't think you will be unhappy with either.


____O
__( \ \_
((_)/ ((_)
Nikhil | Gear List & Market Feedback | Flickr (external link)
Support POTN by donating here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Sep 21, 2011 03:54 |  #7

I'd pick the tamron 17-50 and the sigma 10-20. Overlap is good. It means you won't have to change lenses as often. The sigma also goes 1mm wider, which doesn't seem like a lot on paper, but is noticeable in the real world.

Further, I regard the 11-16 and the 10-20 to be tools for different jobs. The 11-16 is best suited for indoor UWA work due to the aperture and the flare characteristics, whereas the 10-20 is more suited for outdoor work.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JDM555
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
264 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Sep 21, 2011 04:15 |  #8

Thanks for all the help guys. The local 17-50 was sold, but there is still another for $320. I intend to use my 10-20 for outdoors such as landscape or car shoots. So if I won't be using it in very low light, are you saying I shouldn't spend more for the f/2.8? What about doing long exposure night shots? Would the aperture play a big role between the two?


Canon T2i | Tamron 17-50 2.8 | Rokinon 35 1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike
ugly when I'm sober
Avatar
15,397 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 385
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Canterbury/Ramsgate, UK
     
Sep 21, 2011 04:29 |  #9

In short, no. A long exposure night shot will need a tripod and therefore a wide aperture is not necessary.

I used to own both the Sigma 10-20 and 24-70 lenses (Mk 1 versions of each) and found them to be a very good combo of lenses.


www.mikegreenphotograp​hy.co.uk (external link)
Gear
UK South Easterners
flickr (external link) Insta1 (external link) Insta2 (external link)

A closed mouth gathers no foot.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Sep 21, 2011 04:44 |  #10

JDM555 wrote in post #13138026 (external link)
I intend to use my 10-20 for outdoors such as landscape or car shoots. So if I won't be using it in very low light, are you saying I shouldn't spend more for the f/2.8? What about doing long exposure night shots? Would the aperture play a big role between the two?

There is no point in spending more for the aperture, which you won't be using, and losing out on the range. For long exposure, you won't be using the wide aperture. You'll be using a tripod, and closing the aperture down to get more DOF, and an even longer exposure for greater effects.
I've used the sigma before, and though I prefer the canon 10-22, the sigma is not a bad lens, its great value for money.
To illustrate how f2.8 won't really help, here are some shots with EXIF posted:
14mm
F5.0
1/60s
ISO 200
Taken indoors so you can see that for an outdoor car shoot, you don't need 2.8 at all, heck, even indoors you might not need it

IMAGE: http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6016/5947929440_5f6035dacc_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​947929440/  (external link)
IMG_7128 (external link) by noobographer (external link), on Flickr

15mm
F16
76 seconds
ISO 100
No, f2.8 wouldn't help here either ;)
IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Redirected to error image by ZENFOLIO PROTECTED

Actually, this shot was taken with the sigma 10-20, not with my canon. So you can see it is capable of very nice images. There is a tiny bit of blur because I was a complete noob back then (and still am I suppose) and did not know anything about how to focus at night. It is also partly a result of diffraction from shooting at f16, and the bridge I was on wasn't the most stable of structures, nor was I using the best of tripods. It is not because of the lens itself.

-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nikmar08
Goldmember
Avatar
1,852 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 17
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bangalore, India
     
Sep 21, 2011 09:40 |  #11

Sirrith wrote in post #13138063 (external link)
There is a tiny bit of blur because I was a complete noob back then (and still am I suppose) and did not know anything about how to focus at night.

A bit off-topic but it would be interesting to know what if any you do differently to focus at night. I used to get blurry shots in my early days but a tripod solved that issue more or less :)


____O
__( \ \_
((_)/ ((_)
Nikhil | Gear List & Market Feedback | Flickr (external link)
Support POTN by donating here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Sep 21, 2011 10:48 |  #12

nikmar08 wrote in post #13138863 (external link)
A bit off-topic but it would be interesting to know what if any you do differently to focus at night. I used to get blurry shots in my early days but a tripod solved that issue more or less :)

Well I usually manually focus at night, so I had the lens on MF and didn't know anything about where to actually put the focus points and stuff like that.

Now I shine a light onto the subject if I can, just to focus, or I get the subject to hold a light, or I use hyperfocal etc...


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
amfoto1
Cream of the Crop
10,251 posts
Likes: 84
Joined Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, California
     
Sep 21, 2011 11:23 |  #13

You are looking at two different things... An ultra wide angle zooms and a standard zoom.

I'd suggest you consider them separately first... then how they will work together in your kit.

I'm not all that familiar with the standard zooms you are considering... so am not going to try to recommend any of those. If you got a 17-something or 18-something zoom for this purpose, you can complement it with an ultra wide that picks up where the standard zoom leaves off, or have some overlap. Some folks like overlap for convenience, it might mean a little fewer lens changes in the field. On the other hand, it's always nice to maximize your range with whatever lenses you choose, so that you cover as much total range as possible. Gaps between lenses may or may not be imporant. As a rule, they are more bothersome at the wide end (for example between a 10-22 and 28-75 lens), where even a change of two or three mm can be pretty dramatic. With telephotos, a bit of a gap isn't all that big a deal (such as between a 17-55 and 70-200). But If you go with a 24-whatever or 28-whatever as your "standard zoom", you have other choices if you're concerned about the gap.

First, there are now two Sigma 10-20... The cheaper is the one that's been available for some years, has a variable aperature and when I tested one a few years ago, frankly I wasn't all that impressed. It was decent build and IQ, but I felt it was a little soft in certain respects and tended to get halo flares around bright lights too easily. It also is one of the slowest lenses in the category, with f4.5-5.6 vraiable aperture. The new Siggy 10-20 is a fixed aperture f3.5 lens and is considerably more expensive. I haven't used the new lens, so can't really comment, but have seen some really nice images taken with it.

Canon 10-22 has overall excellent IQ and is the best of the bunch handling flare, which can often be a concern when working with an ultra wide angle lens. Frankly this lens is pretty amazing in this respect. It's also about the most expensive choice by a significant margin and it appears the OP is trying to stay within a fairly tight budget.

The lens I use is Tokina 12-24/4. It's quite good, too, though a little less capable controlling flare than the Canon 10-22. I like the 12-24 better than the Tokina 11-16/2.8 because it's a better range of focal lengths and I have little need for f2.8 on an UWA lens (and suspect this is actually true of most folks). And it doesn't hurt that the 12-24 is about $100 cheaper than the 11-16/2.8 (and about $300 cheaper than the Canon 10-22).

Another possibility is the Tamron 10-24. I haven't used it so can't really comment about it.

Pricewise, cheapest are the Siggy 10-20/4.5-5.6 and Tammy 10-24. Toki 12-24 is a wee bit more. The Toki 11-16 and Siggy 10-20/3.5 are a bit pricier. And the Canon 10-22 is the most expensive in this category.

I haven't included even wider lenses such as Siggy 8-16 or more expensive full frame capable Siggy 12-24 here.

Really they are all pretty well built. AF performance won't be all that different, either. I worried about the lack of USM with the Tokina I bought, but it turned out to be a non-issue on an UWA. They don't have to move their focusing elements much to achieve focus, so it's near instantaneous even without USM (or Sigma's HSM). Focus accuracy also isn't critical with an ultra wide, either.... you usually have so much depth of field that any slight error is completely hidden.


Alan Myers (external link) "Walk softly and carry a big lens."
5DII, 7DII(x2), 7D(x2) & other cameras. 10-22mm, Tokina 12-24/4, 20/2.8, TS 24/3.5L, 24-70/2.8L, 28/1.8, 28-135 IS (x2), TS 45/2.8, 50/1.4, Tamron 60/2.0, 70-200/4L IS, 70-200/2.8 IS, 85/1.8, Tamron 90/2.5 Macro, 100/2.8 USM, 100-400L II, 135/2L, 180/3.5L, 300/4L IS (x2), 300/2.8L IS, 500/4L IS, EF 1.4X II, EF 2X II. Flashes, studio strobes & various access. - FLICKR (external link) - ZENFOLIO (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,190 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2610
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Sep 21, 2011 12:00 |  #14

when did the tokina 12-24mm get so expensive...i remember when it used to be priced along side the sigma 10-20mm...

it looks like the version 1 still sells for the cheapest used though...if you're looking for rock bottom budget options


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stump
Senior Member
Avatar
772 posts
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Knoxville TN
     
Sep 21, 2011 12:12 |  #15

I wouldn't worry about your lenses overlapping. I really don't think you will be in a situation were you are using a 24-70 and you really wish you could go 22-23mm.

If I were you, I would look at the lens reviews and just figure out one lens you know for sure you want. Then, go from there. I've bought and sold so many lenses it's crazy.

If it were me, I would get a Canon 10-22mm and a Canon 17-55 IS f2.8 if you aren't going to go FF.

Both of those are more than double the money of the lenses you have listed but, IMO worth it overall.

I had a Canon 10-22 and I absolutely loved it!


6D - 50 1.8 - 50 1.4 - 70-200F4L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,763 views & 0 likes for this thread
Little confused on picking lenses, can I get some help?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Ivy Yeh
672 guests, 243 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.