Going to go to full frame. Hate to give up my Sigma 17-50

Can someone tell me if there's a comparable alternative for full frame? I am not having any luck finding anything. Best thing seems to probably be Canon 28-135 but the aperture range isn't near as good as the constant 2.8 of the Sigma.

Wouldn't a 24-70mm f2.8 of sorts (Sigma, Tamron, Canon) be comparable?

yep the 24-70 will be your closest match. just pick one that fits your budget..

CJCMarquez wrote in post #15266555
Wouldn't a 24-70mm f2.8 of sorts (Sigma, Tamron, Canon) be comparable?

lomenak wrote in post #15266565
yep the 24-70 will be your closest match. just pick one that fits your budget..

Well sorry for being an idiot, guys. Was thinking Canon only had one in that range.
Looks like the Sigma is the closest as far as price too. Just can't afford the Tamron and Canon flavors. The Sigma is probably out of my price range at this point too. Might have to settle for a 50 1.4 or something for the time being.

Also look at the 24-105mm or Tamron 28-75mm if you want a really inexpensive lens.

It happens to the best of us. I'm always still surprised by all the options of lens out there.

I think a 50 would be nice. IMO, the 50 was always a nice FL on full frame (film for me). Wish I could afford digital full frame.

The 24-105 f4 IS is also a great match for full frame if you don't have to have the f/2.8. It can usually be had cheaper than the other 2 as well. I've seen them in the $700 range used locally on Craigslist.

I have the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and I absolutely love it. Great sharpness, constant 2.8, great walk-around length, and awesome price. I'd go for this, and if you're unhappy with it, sell it and try a 24-70.

deronsizemore wrote in post #15266601
Well sorry for being an idiot, guys. Was thinking Canon only had one in that range.
Looks like the Sigma is the closest as far as price too. Just can't afford the Tamron and Canon flavors. The Sigma is probably out of my price range at this point too. Might have to settle for a 50 1.4 or something for the time being.

I had been using Canon 50 1.8 I and then Sigma 50 1.4 as my only lens for my Canon 5D when I switched for more than 6 months and I LOVED it.
I was doing a lot of landscape shots even with that but I am stitching almost always anyway..

Josh_30 wrote in post #15266625
The 24-105 f4 IS is also a great match for full frame if you don't have to have the f/2.8. It can usually be had cheaper than the other 2 as well. I've seen them in the $700 range used locally on Craigslist.

The 24-105L is a great walk around zoom to pair with a fast prime or two for full frame. You can get it new as part of a 5D2 or 5D3 kit for $800, which is a good price for such a versatile lens, IMO.

Rush87 wrote in post #15266610
Also look at the 24-105mm or Tamron 28-75mm if you want a really inexpensive lens.

I hadn't really considered teh 24-105 just because of the f4, but I could probably make it work and then just by a 50 1.8 for the times I needed a wider aperture. I'll check out the Tamron 28-75. I've heard good things about it.

CJCMarquez wrote in post #15266613
It happens to the best of us. I'm always still surprised by all the options of lens out there.

I think a 50 would be nice. IMO, the 50 was always a nice FL on full frame (film for me). Wish I could afford digital full frame.

That's likely what I'll go with at this point. I guess it really shouldn't be THAT big of a deal especially since I wasn't looking for a really wide range zoom anyway. I could simply take a couple steps forward or back to mimic those distances.

Josh_30 wrote in post #15266625
The 24-105 f4 IS is also a great match for full frame if you don't have to have the f/2.8. It can usually be had cheaper than the other 2 as well. I've seen them in the $700 range used locally on Craigslist.

I like the wider constant aperture, but as I said above, I could maybe go with the 24-105 and then grab a nifty-fifty for use when I need something wider in lower light.

Russo09 wrote in post #15266628
I have the Tamron 28-75 2.8 and I absolutely love it. Great sharpness, constant 2.8, great walk-around length, and awesome price. I'd go for this, and if you're unhappy with it, sell it and try a 24-70.

Thanks, I had forgotten about that lens too. Seems to be a big following for that lens. good price too. Wish it had image stabilization (the Sigma I have has spoiled me in that regard as it picks up the slack with my novice skills sometimes) but I guess you can't have your cake an eat it too. With IS added, the lens would be considerably more expensive.

Do you have a few shots you can point me to in your flickr stream that was taken with your 5Dc and the Tamron?

lomenak wrote in post #15266651
I had been using Canon 50 1.8 I and then Sigma 50 1.4 as my only lens for my Canon 5D when I switched for more than 6 months and I LOVED it.
I was doing a lot of landscape shots even with that but I am stitching almost always anyway..

I've heard good things about the Sigma 50 1.4. I'd likely go for the Canon simply for size and price though. Might give both a try, but unless completely blown away by the Sigma, I can't see paying the extra money.

Scott M wrote in post #15267446
The 24-105L is a great walk around zoom to pair with a fast prime or two for full frame. You can get it new as part of a 5D2 or 5D3 kit for $800, which is a good price for such a versatile lens, IMO.

Thanks. That's a good idea, I think. Use it for the walk around type lens and then grab the nifty-fifty on the cheap for when I need it.

The 24-105 is the 17-50's equivalent in the fstop department since you gain at least an extra stop of light when moving up from a crop sensor. It also has the benefit of being longer and lighter than most of its common competitors. Lots of happy users of it. I picked one up the other day but haven't had a chance to upload any of the images to my computer. I can already tell that it is going to be my go-to lens when it comes to traveling though.

Stir Fry A Lot wrote in post #15267970
The 24-105 is the 17-50's equivalent in the fstop department since you gain at least an extra stop of light when moving up from a crop sensor. It also has the benefit of being longer and lighter than most of its common competitors. Lots of happy users of it. I picked one up the other day but haven't had a chance to upload any of the images to my computer. I can already tell that it is going to be my go-to lens when it comes to traveling though.

Thanks for the input. Just wish it wasn't so damn expensive, but like others have said, you can get it for decent price used. Might have to go that route. I'm sure there's more than a few people selling here on POTN. Might also check lensrentals used gear.

I used to feel that way too but it actually seems like a really good deal once you have it in your hands. The build quality is excellent and the range is perfect for general purpose use. Seems more like a good value L lens rather than just a kit lens to me now.

When you go to full frame I recommend you get rid of the low end glass and start investing in better lenses. Depends on what you want really badly (FF or good lenses), I'd recommend lenses first though.