Another one of those lens choice threads!

Well as you can see from my sig, my lens lineup is pretty empty, which is a good thing and a bad thing all in itself. Im starting in the right place early enough that hopefully I can prevent wasting money buying things twice, tho at the same time I dont have enough selection to know what FL Im most comfortable with.

I previously owned a Sigma 24-70 2.8 EX DG macro, and overall I was very disappointed with the FL on my 400D. Not wide enough and not long enough over my 50mm to make me happy, not to mention the colors seemed redish and almost muddy. With that experience I tend to feel more comfortable with the extra money spent on Canon...


Heres what Im getting at. Sometime this summer my girlfriend and I are going to get married, and shortly after are planning to honeymoon in CA, do the whole Disneyland and Redwood forest thing, and more than likely a few other places if possible. This has kinda thrown a monkey wrench into my dream lens lineup so to say...

Budget is limited right now, since wedding expenses and exact date arent set, but its safe to say that $500 is fairly easy do once my taxes some in. But there is also the chance that the wedding and honey moon will cost less than expected with family pitching in and such, tho right now Im penny pinching and will more than likely have much more than is needed.


I was originally going to go with a prime heavy setup, but a vacation like that I dont see myself wanting to lug around alot of lenses. Chances are that I will want to carry around 2 lens max so that I can enjoy the experience more than the photography part.


Here were the options I was considering:

Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM $229 and 50mm f/1.4 USM $289

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II $449 and maybe later 100mm 2.8 macro or 85mm 1.8?

Current lineup + Canon 100mm 2.8 macro $434

Id really like to cover the 18-100mm range, and ultimately option 2 would be the perfect setup but Im not 100% sure that I will have the extra funds without cutting corners. Option 1 is apealing because it would allow me to have 1 lens on the body 90% of the time and get a majority of the shots, tho I would be limited to the 50mm focal length in low light areas, which isnt much of a problem unless Im in a small room.

To anyone whos been to those places, do you find yourself mostly in the 17-50 range? or do you get alot of use out of the 85-100 range?

Long read. Some people never use telephotos, some never used wide angles. It varies. You must have gotten some idea of what lengths you need. To start with the Tamron 17-50 is a good idea in general.

The Tamron 17-50mm is a good, sharp, versatile and relatively wide lens however it is not as sharp as the 50mm f/1.8II in my opinion. It is a very good focal length though, I find it satisfies my needs 95% of the time.

RE: the 50mm's, although some complain about the bokeh of the 50mm f/1.8II, portraits are really good with this lens. Given you have a 50mm f/1.8II I don't see much reason to change to the 50mm f/1.4 unless you hate the bokeh or you want quieter auto focusing or better build quality.

Do you think you might need some on the telephoto end? How about the 70-200mm f/4L?

Off topic but it just hit me that in the US the 100mm macro is currently cheaper than the Tamron 17-50, here in Australia the 100mm is almost twice the price...talk about weirdness...

70-200 f/4 is a bit to big to be lugging around for this occasion, and I'm not sure I want to neglect the wide end either.

Optically, my 50mm 1.8 is great, and the bokeh isn't an eyesore either. I'm mostly concerned with the build quality, and often refer to the lense as a "marraca" (spelling?). Plus my kit lense focuses faster it seems. Overall my 50mm is on my camera 90% of the time, so stepping the 1.4 would be a very worthwile and highly used upgrade, even over a 17-50 f/2.8.

As a general walk around lens (especially in good light) I found the Sigma 18-200 OS to be very versatile and the IQ is surprisingly good (better than my 50mm f/1.8 which I returned)
Romy also noted that the Sig delivered quite good results: http://www.pbase.com/l​ightrules/maintests