my zoom trinity???

I think after a few years off learning and understanding my shooting needs I feel I can trim my collection down and have "my" zoom holy trinity.
However I would like you're input on pinning down my middle zoom.
I already have the 70-200 2.8 L is, I'm going to get the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and I'm really leaning toward the 24-70 4.0 is over the 24-105 4.0 is.
I shoot in low light a lot and who doesn't like fast glass. Is there another lens at that price point that I should consider?
I'm definitely more of a zoom man, I have kids and it's just not practical for me to zoom over the lens doing it for me..

used canon 24-70mm 2.8 ver 1

Tamron 24-70 2.8. Sharp, VC, and same price as used Canon V1.

flowrider wrote in post #16741944
Tamron 24-70 2.8. Sharp, VC, and same price as used Canon V1.

Not sure I'm good enough to shoot without is.. are those both non is?

Heya,

Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC

The VC is the same as IS.

Very best,

flowrider wrote in post #16741944
Tamron 24-70 2.8. Sharp, VC, and same price as used Canon V1.

This.

No point getting the Canon 24-70 f4 when the Tamron exists.

The 0.7x macro function of the Canon 24-70mm f/4L IS is really nice. It makes a great walk around lens. Plus it has weather sealing, great for those days at the beach or having the family around a waterpark or waterfall. The Tamron does have a "moisture resistant construction", but I can only speak for Canon when I say the weather sealing on the L lenses I have used in the rain is awesome.

Since you shoot a lot of low light, I do think that f/2.8 would be a higher priority for you. The Tamron would be the best choice with it's f/2.8 and VC (Vibration Control)

Sirrith wrote in post #16742242
This.

No point getting the Canon 24-70 f4 when the Tamron exists.

Thank you, just spent the last hour reading up on this gem.

It be kinda neat to have a threesome with three different brands. I'm not above it,

Sigma 18-35 1.8
Tamron 24-70 2.8 w/VC
Canon 70-200 2.8 w/IS

Never getting rid of my Canon 100mm 2.8 macro, it will be the fifth wheel lol.
That lens scares me some times, its the sharpest cleanest lens I've ever owned or operated. I don't even regard it as normal lens, it has been forged by the camera gods themselves.

I can vouch for the Tammy 24-70.. Unbelievable lens for the price. Tack sharp and vivid colors. Some look funny at me holding a Tamron instead of a red ring unicorn, but I get the same results for half the price

xanctum wrote in post #16742834
I can vouch for the Tammy 24-70.. Unbelievable lens for the price. Tack sharp and vivid colors. Some look funny at me holding a Tamron instead of a red ring unicorn, but I get the same results for half the price

I really doubt anyone looking at you really know any difference between a lens costing $5000 and a lens costing $50. Only gear bitheads really look for that red ring.

Hogloff wrote in post #16743289
I really doubt anyone looking at you really know any difference between a lens costing $5000 and a lens costing $50. Only gear bitheads really look for that red ring.

You would be surprised then.. things here in NZ may be a bit different. I had a guy completely disrespect me in front of a client for using my Sigma 85 while he was on a walkabout with a 70-200 2.8 V1.. Said it was less then professional. I laughed of course.

I'm need to know what bag can I get that will hold those three, my 580ex, and my camera body... plus extras like batteries?
Just bought my 18-35 can't wait for it to come in...