Sigma 24-70

Hello -

I have a fairly crappy long lens, but I feel like a short lens is creating a hole in my kit.

I've looked at the 24-70 by both sigma and canon, and the canon is much more expensive, so I 've put it out of my price range. I know somebody who has the 24-70 f/2.8 and likes it, but I am wondering, is this a general walk around lens? I would like to do a bit of macro, but mostly people and things (I love journalism). I would be willing to wait a substantial length of time longer and get the canon L but that would blow thepossibility of be getting a 20D in 2007 (will there still be a 20D in '07 made)

Thanks in advance.
Andrew

The Sigma seems right up your alley. It's optically a VERY good lens. I don't see any lens fitting your bill any better. As for the 20D, it will be discontinued by 2007.

Awesome Any knowlege on when by 2007? i was thinking about picking one up this time a year from now?

calgaryphotographer wrote:
Awesome Any knowlege on when by 2007? i was thinking about picking one up this time a year from now?

No, I don't have any credible knowledge about when the 20D will be discontinued but all the talk is that Canon will have its replacement sometime in 2006. If the 20D goes through 2007, cows will fly.

I'll keep watching here, but thanks for the advice on the 24-70...Just need the money now :S

Do a search here as there is lots of info on both the Sigma and Canon options. I went with the Sigma and it's a very good lens indeed but the Canon is also very popular. Personally, I'd look at the 14-105 IS LO before the Canon 24-70 as a walkaround, but the price is still heafty!

i bought the sigma (non dg ) for £180 compared to the dg ver at £280
bought it 2 weeks ago, not had much chance to put it through its paces yet , but took some shots and they look very good.
only downside is the size and weight

The Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 should do fine for you. Later, when you save money, you will be able to sell it for almost what your paid for it and get the L. At least you will have something in the meantime.

I love my Sigma lenses. A couple friends of mine have the L's, and said they would spend the money elsewhere before buying anothe 24-70L. Not that it's a bad lense, just $1200 seems steep for that lense.

Here's a pic from my new 24-70

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

But why??????

It's Love Al ... and love is blind to reason!

But as someone mentioned somewhere else ... if you're taking shots in a downpour you'll be happy to have spend around £4000 on a weatherproof lens and body. Me, I'll sit in a cafe and read the football pages until it stops

condyk wrote:
Me, I'll sit in a cafe and read the football pages until it stops

Now do you mean by "football" soccer? You need to clarify for us misguided Americans.

Now you're in danger of diverting the whole thread Jojo! The only football worth talking about is that played with an odd-shaped ball WITHOUT pads and helmets!

Dave, just think of all those shots you missed by not spending £4000!

I prefer to think of all the smashing cuppa's I've had and all the news I've caught up on. Hell, I might have even slipped while out shooting in the rain and fallen under a bus. I think these are all excellent reasons NOT to buy weather proof nonesense

Mr Jojo ... as you well know as a 'player' yourself, the US 'game' (sic.) was invented only because the invaders of that fine country of yours couldn't remember the rules of either Association Football or Rugby, as invented here in blighty (along with Cricket and Tennis and more) so they had to make something up to amuse themselves when not rustling each other cows and wives.