Canon Lens Upgrade for SIgma 17-70mm/f2.8-4.5

First, for point of reference, I admittedly have not refined my photographic skills to the point of exceeding the capabilities of my DSLR & lenses.

I am using a Canon 400D with a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 walkaround lens. Every so often I come across a too-good-to-resist deal on camera gear. With that in mind, I would appreciate your thoughts on a Canon lens (non-L series) that you would consider to be superior to the Sigma. By "superior" I am referring to IQ, lens speed & other attributes of the lens.

Thank you for your suggestions.

Kit

Probably one of the 17-50ish f2.8 zooms, with the Canon 17-55 at the top of the list. Another option would be to try a fast prime.

You're not going to find one. The only 2 Canon options for that focal-range, are the 17-55 IS and the 15-85 IS. Both are MUCH more expensive, and while they might offer slightly better IQ, the 17-55 doesn't cover the range..and the 15-85 is slower.

I have the same lens, the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 (no OS), and I am eyeing the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS to replace it. If I find a smoking deal on the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS then I will snag that, but for the difference in price the Sigma is the better buy it seems.

Thank you, all, for the feedback. Admittedly, the Sigma 17-70 has been a practical focal range while traveling with only one lens. However, I'm open to considering a narrower range (e.g. 17-55) if the other attributes of the lens are worth the price.

Why only canon?

You could look at the 15-85, or the upgraded version of the sigma 17-70, or the sigma or tamron 17-50's.

Sirrith wrote in post #13131931
Why only canon?

You could look at the 15-85, or the upgraded version of the sigma 17-70, or the sigma or tamron 17-50's.

I agree with this. Get the new 17-70 (the OS version). It is slightly faster, has slightly better IQ and it has an impressive OS system. It meets all of your wants - faster, better IQ and other attributes. Plus it is cheaper than the Canon alternatives.

Tim

Sirrith wrote in post #13131931
Why only canon?

You could look at the 15-85, or the upgraded version of the sigma 17-70, or the sigma or tamron 17-50's.

Point well-taken. I probably am guilty of being a bit myopic. Since I have a couple of Canon primes at I am very impressed with, I have a tendency to stay within the Canon line.

I admit that the Sigma 17-70 OS is appealing.

Thanks again.

The 17-70 OS is a great lens, I've used one for the last couple months.

I had the same non OS Sigma 17-70 lens you have. I sold it for $300 and found a used Canon 15-85 for $550. I debated for a long time whether to go the 17-55/17-50 f2.8 route or the 15-85 and eventually add a fast 30mm prime for indoor. I decided to go with the 15-85 and couldn't be happier. I have only had the lens about a week but can already see a significant difference between it and the Sigma. Having the extra 2mm on the short side and 15mm on the long side is more significant than it sounds on paper. In fact I was also thinking about a Canon 10-22 or Tokina 11-16 for landscapes, but after seeing how the 15-85 works at 15mm, I dont see any need to get a wider angle. I may spring for a wider prime at some time if need be. Also, I am not sure the 15-85 is a slouch in low light either. Here is a photo I took with it last night in my house using no flash. It is handheld at 70mm / f/5.6 at 1/20 second. I also threw in a couple of quick snaps I took the other day outdoors as well . JMHO Good Luck!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/torchrider/6165​087578/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/torchrider/6156​217455/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/torchrider/6156​858732/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/torchrider/6156​735112/

kitjv wrote in post #13132638
Point well-taken. I probably am guilty of being a bit myopic. Since I have a couple of Canon primes at I am very impressed with, I have a tendency to stay within the Canon line.

I admit that the Sigma 17-70 OS is appealing.

Thanks again.

Sigma primes can be impressive too

And the 17-70 OS is no slouch either.

Some examples:

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​714362310/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​663294086/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …s/noobography/5​954871641/