If you could spend my money...

I am looking at investing in my first high quality lense.

Brief background: I started out with the kit lenses from my film RebelX (kit lense and Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 II.

I still use the 75-300mm with my Digital Rebel (300D) for sports and can live with it for now. I replaced the kit lense from my RebelX with the SIGMA 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 DC. I am happy with this lense as it gets me the original FOV I had with my film camera. The quality is okay for now but my images often lack the 'punch' I often see from the many 'L' users on the forum.

I am most delighted with my thrifty 50-Canon EF50mm f/1.8 II. Crisp shots with superb DOF and very fast indoors. This is the direction I would like to continue.

Soooo, as mentioned, I would like to shoot with a higher quality lense but I want to fill in the fov I am missing in my lenses: between 50mm-75mm. I think this would accomplish several things:

After a little research I am seriously considering:
Sigma Zoom Wide Angle- Telephoto 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF
This lense us about $400 US (budget is flexible, but would like to stay sub$700)
I would like a fast lense (low light/good depth of field) but if I'm going to spend the money, I want excellent quality. I think this would be a super lense for formal portraiture as well.

Please offer you opinion/advice/experie​nce with this or similar lense.

Yes, this lens would be right up your alley. See my site for more on this lens.

Thanks fstopjojo- your sight is excellent, you've certainly done a lot of research. Seems like you know what your talking about. I also read your thought on the post "24-70 Canon vs. Sigma: Why buy L?". They are very helpful too.

The Sigma is excellent. I had one. Great value and build with great IQ for a zoom. Your shots should pop nicely if you expose well. You don't need an L to get that

Thanks condyk and fstopjoj for the advice. Your's along with several from another thread has led me toward the Sigma 24-70mm EX DG Macro.

I think/hope this lense will bring me a lot of enjoyment. As mentioned in another thread...
- it will be the best quality lense in my bag
- my ego will be as large as the 82mm filters I bought to go with the lense
- my photo's will be sharper and more saturated than any I've ever taken
- and, most importantly:
- it NOT improve my composition, focus, or creativity!

Thanks again!

Sounds like a candidate for a prime lens to me.

The 85mm 1.8 is an excellent lens. If you have the money to spend the 1.2 version is next on my list.

The 135 is also a nice lens, a little long for the shots I normally take. The quality of the photos I have seen from it is top notch.

I haven't upgraded my 50 1.8, although I know I wouldn't regret it if I did.

Good luck. Let us know what you end up with

solinger wrote:
Sounds like a candidate for a prime lens to me.

The 85mm 1.8 is an excellent lens. If you have the money to spend the 1.2 version is next on my list.

The 135 is also a nice lens, a little long for the shots I normally take. The quality of the photos I have seen from it is top notch.

I haven't upgraded my 50 1.8, although I know I wouldn't regret it if I did.

Good luck. Let us know what you end up with

Thanks for the comments- I have a feeling that primes are on the horizon, not any time soon, but I'm sure they'll be calling. The 50mm 1.8 I have is simply amazing. Seeing some of the f/1.4 results on the forum makes me want to try it.

You really need the 70-200 2.8 or the F4 L will work just as well

for low light, nothing really beats a prime in my opinion. ge tthe 85 1.8, it's well worth it. it'll give you a little more reach, though. if anything, go with the 50 1.8 or the 1.4.