Crop zooms to complement sigma 18-35 f/1.8?

I just picked up the above lens and man it really is amazing. I have a pretty good collection of lenses, some crop some full frame, but they are mostly average middle of the road nice but not more than $500 a piece at most. After finally dropping some cash on a really nice lens I want more. I have every range covered, but I want to start replacing my 'ok' lenses with some that are up to par with the sigma. What are your guys thoughts?

Well there is the soon to be released sigma 50-100mm f1.8. Not a lens I'm personally interested in at this time but it's sure to be very nice I have no doubt. If it does interest you I'd say wait till it's released and see what the reviewers have to say.

I personally think the sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS is a great lens to pair with the 18-35mm f1.8. But it is discontinued so finding it new might be hard. The up side is with the release of the 50-100 the 50-150 OS price might drop on the used market. So you might find a good price on a used one.

If you want a lens that will work on both crop and full frame then any of the 70-200mm are a good choice. The canon f4 version (both IS and non-IS) are very nice lenses that are a little smaller then the f2.8 versions. But if you want f2.8 then then canon f2.8L IS is the king. The tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VC is also a very nice lens. The sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS is good but I think the canon and tamron are better.

Another combo I like with the sigma 18-35 is a 50mm (I use the canon f1.8 mk1) and 85mm (canon f1.8 here) lens. Covers a good range, but they are not zoom obviously. Still a nice little f1.8 combo. If that combo is something that interest you but you want someone higher end then the sigma 50mm f1.4 is supposed to be very good. For the 85mm there is the sigma f1.4 but I'm sure they will update it with an art version soonish, and the new tamron 85.

What are your other lenses? I was going to suggest the upcoming 50-150, as well. If it's anywhere close to the 18-35, it's gonna be a hell of a lens.

if your current gear list is correct, then i think the sigma 10-20mm, sigma 18-35f1.8, canon 100mm macro, and 70-300L all don't really need replacing, unless you find them lacking in some way...i noticed you don't really own any faster primes...that's something i'd maybe look into...something like an 85mm f1.8 maybe

I just started adding stuff to my gear list, it isn't complete. The 70-300 should be the USM IS one, not the L though.

I updated my gear list. I think i got everything. I have stuff spread out in several bags that I had to dig through. Have a bunch of film stuff (Canon EF, and FD stuff, plus a couple medium format cameras) too. Black and white film is a lot of fun

I think I will go with the 50-150 next. That extra reach I think will be more useful for me. Though the 50-100 1.8 sounds really nice too. Maybe I will eventually end up with both, lol.

How about the wide end? Looking on DXOmark all the wide zooms are kinda meh at best. My 10-20 is the old version which has even worse marks, but I must say as far as colors and contrast it is pretty nice.

Stregone wrote in post #17945626
How about the wide end? Looking on DXOmark all the wide zooms are kinda meh at best. My 10-20 is the old version which has even worse marks, but I must say as far as colors and contrast it is pretty nice.

Don't take DxOMark as gospel; their methods of measurement and calculation lead to simple conclusions which contradict the experience of many experienced photographers, here and elsewhere. Look in the lens comparison forums here, ask about specific units, or check out The-Digital-Picture.com for a more balanced viewpoint including samples, tests and comparisons.

The bottom line should be what YOU need and want. Remember, this is a gear forum, and people will always be skewed toward the new, exotic, and fancy lenses. If your post-processing software is good (heck, even Canon's DPP is very powerful if you don't want to invest a lot) you can correct almost any "defect" of a modern lens except the basic resolution. I've taken some perfectly satisfactory pictures for clients using a Rebel and a kit lens; don't let the pixel-peepers bully you into buying something that doesn't provide you with tangible benefits for your particular task.

There are some ultrawides which take great photos, even though they may not yield perfect measurements. Decide first if your 10-20 is really lacking in something that a new lens will bring, though; you might find that other lenses have issues which bother you and aren't a big talking point. One example: I avoid non-Canon zooms solely because the zoom operates in the opposite direction on all 3rd-party lenses. Some people couldn't care less; but when I switch lenses it takes me too long to mentally switch gears, and I miss shots. Another issue I have seen is that trying to hold a lens without accidentally nudging the focus ring (adjacent to the zoom ring) caused some problems. Try to actually handle the lens you're looking at - you may find something which jumps out at you and isn't discussed in reviews.

GregDunn wrote in post #17945676
One example: I avoid non-Canon zooms solely because the zoom operates in the opposite direction on all 3rd-party lenses. Some people couldn't care less; but when I switch lenses it takes me too long to mentally switch gears, and I miss shots.

^ I don't think folks consider the directionality conventions enough when considering lens selection or even the hazards of switching brands of bodies (and the different conventions followed by their native lenses).

Canon: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Tamron: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Tokina: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Sigma: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Nikon: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Sony: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Pentax: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Olympus: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity

At least all lenses follow the same directionality for f/stop, since that is controlled by the body, unlike the SLR lenses with diaphram conrol rings on them

Wilt wrote in post #17945723
^ I don't think folks consider the directionality conventions enough when considering lens selection or even the hazards of switching brands of bodies (and the different conventions followed by their native lenses).

Canon: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Tamron: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Tokina: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Sigma: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Nikon: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Sony: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Pentax: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Olympus: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity

At least all lenses follow the same directionality for f/stop, since that is controlled by the body, unlike the SLR lenses with diaphram conrol rings on them

Wilt some Sigma lenses turn the same way as you have indicated, and some in the opposite direction. My 28-300 zoom, as well as my 150-600 C work as you have indicated, but my 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG, which is an older design than the other two goes Nikon wise. I had a look at a Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, the original one, not the HSM or OS variants, and that was also Nikon wise.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #17945742
Wilt some Sigma lenses turn the same way as you have indicated, and some in the opposite direction. My 28-300 zoom, as well as my 150-600 C work as you have indicated, but my 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG, which is an older design than the other two goes Nikon wise. I had a look at a Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, the original one, not the HSM or OS variants, and that was also Nikon wise.

Alan

The 18-35/1.8 zooms opposite my 17-50/2.8 OS. And correct my if I am wrong because I am only looking at pictures, but don't the Tammy 15-30 and 24-70 VC focus opposite of each other?

GregDunn wrote in post #17945676
Don't take DxOMark as gospel; their methods of measurement and calculation lead to simple conclusions which contradict the experience of many experienced photographers, here and elsewhere. Look in the lens comparison forums here, ask about specific units, or check out The-Digital-Picture.com for a more balanced viewpoint including samples, tests and comparisons.

The bottom line should be what YOU need and want. Remember, this is a gear forum, and people will always be skewed toward the new, exotic, and fancy lenses. If your post-processing software is good (heck, even Canon's DPP is very powerful if you don't want to invest a lot) you can correct almost any "defect" of a modern lens except the basic resolution. I've taken some perfectly satisfactory pictures for clients using a Rebel and a kit lens; don't let the pixel-peepers bully you into buying something that doesn't provide you with tangible benefits for your particular task.

There are some ultrawides which take great photos, even though they may not yield perfect measurements. Decide first if your 10-20 is really lacking in something that a new lens will bring, though; you might find that other lenses have issues which bother you and aren't a big talking point. One example: I avoid non-Canon zooms solely because the zoom operates in the opposite direction on all 3rd-party lenses. Some people couldn't care less; but when I switch lenses it takes me too long to mentally switch gears, and I miss shots. Another issue I have seen is that trying to hold a lens without accidentally nudging the focus ring (adjacent to the zoom ring) caused some problems. Try to actually handle the lens you're looking at - you may find something which jumps out at you and isn't discussed in reviews.

I know, thats why I am asking you guys your opinions too

DXOMark is nice because its an objective (if incomplete) view. Plus where else are you going to find a test of a modern lens on a 40D, or an older lens on a modern 70D?

My main concern is consciously or subconsciously not using the 10-20 because my 18-35 is soo much better in every way. Like I said I like the contrast and colors it has, i'll have to do some testing since I don't think I have used it in a serious capacity on my newer 70D. I was hoping someone had some insights regarding it and more recent lenses like the f3.5 that sigma replaced it with or the canon ef-s 11-22 or 10-18.

I must say though, I am not a fan of the build of canon ef-s lenses. Even the really nice ones feel like kit lenses.

BigAl007 wrote in post #17945742
Wilt some Sigma lenses turn the same way as you have indicated, and some in the opposite direction. My 28-300 zoom, as well as my 150-600 C work as you have indicated, but my 20-40 f/2.8 EX DG, which is an older design than the other two goes Nikon wise. I had a look at a Sigma 50-150 f/2.8, the original one, not the HSM or OS variants, and that was also Nikon wise.

Alan

I thought that some vendors might not be consistent with itself, and might offer configurations which were consistent with the camera vendor they were providing their lens to fit, but I could not find any example consistent with that theory. You seem to show that simply Sigma is not consistent with itself, even for the same brand of camera?!

FEChariot wrote in post #17945768
T And correct my if I am wrong because I am only looking at pictures, but don't the Tammy 15-30 and 24-70 VC focus opposite of each other?

Indeed the 15-30 is: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
while the 24-70 is: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near

Wilt wrote in post #17945723
^ I don't think folks consider the directionality conventions enough when considering lens selection or even the hazards of switching brands of bodies (and the different conventions followed by their native lenses).

Canon: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Tamron: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Tokina: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Sigma: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Nikon: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Sony: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity
Pentax: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Olympus: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity

At least all lenses follow the same directionality for f/stop, since that is controlled by the body, unlike the SLR lenses with diaphram conrol rings on them

I really thought it would bother me, having a lens where either the zoom or the focus ring operated in the opposite direction from my Canon lenses...

Then I got a Tokina and started using it. I honestly don't even notice the reverse direction of the rotating rings when shooting with that lens. IMO, it's a complete non-issue.

amfoto1 wrote in post #17945836
I really thought it would bother me, having a lens where either the zoom or the focus ring operated in the opposite direction from my Canon lenses...

Then I got a Tokina and started using it. I honestly don't even notice the reverse direction of the rotating rings when shooting with that lens. IMO, it's a complete non-issue.

\

I have these three...

Canon: Zoom FL short ---> long, Focus near--->Infinity
Tamron: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus Infinity<---near
Tokina: Zoom FL long<---short, Focus near--->Infinity

None match for both functions!

I do have to admit that if I am in a fast shooting situation, I do get it backward as to which direction to do what. Yet it does not bother me for family snapshooting, but when I am in a fast paced shooting situation and changing lenses, it does matter. If I am shooting basketball game, with a single lens and not swapping lenses, it takes a little bit to initially acclimate to the lens which is mounted and adjust FL without ambiguity. Fortunately I do not manually adjust focus very much at all, or it would be bothersome in fast situations to have lenses of THREE variations on the theme!