Lens Comparison

Firstly, Hi! I'm new. Hopefully spend some time here (just recently bought a 400D). I'm sorry for what will probably end up being a long post.

I'm looking for a general zoom, mainly to replace the kit lens, but not necessarily the same focal range. I mainly use my camera for shooting kayaking and skiing where I typically need 1/1000 kinda shutter speeds. However I live in Scotland (its always dark) and I'm a student (poor). Maybe this is the wrong hobby for me??! Currently own the Nifty Fifty, which I love, and the Kit Lens.

Currently looking at:
Tamron 17 - 50, Tamron 28 - 75, Sigma 18 - 50, Sigma 24 - 70 (all quite fast - f/2.8) but I was wondering about the quality of these lenses? They are all very cheap for such a fast aperture, where's the catch? There is no point in having a lens that goes down to f/2.8 if I can't use it because it's too soft and the colours are rubbish...

I've heard great things about the Canon 15 - 85, but I'm not sure its fast enough (f/3.5 - 5.6), and I've heard even better things about the Canon 17 - 55 f/2.8, but that is wayyy out of my price range.

Basically I'm looking at the Sigma's and Tamron's just now, they are within my price range and are really fast. If everybody says they are rubbish, I might just go with a Canon 100mm f/2.0.

Anyway, </wall'o'text>

Thanks
Chris

I've got the Sigma 18-50 2.8 Macro and I chose it over the Tamron for two main reasons. One, it has 1:3 macro capabilities and two, I like their finishes better. Other than that, they're supposedly comparable (I've never personally used the Tamron so this is from what I've read). That said, I love my Sigma. It's very sharp, even at 2.8 (was a must in my book) and I got it as an upgrade from my 18-55 non-IS.

Personally, I feel that the other two lenses you mentioned (the 24-70 and 28-75) are not wide enough on a crop. I find that I use 18mm very often with my Sigma. It's really up to you, though. Would you rather have the wide end (18/17) or the reach (70/75)?

You might want to take a look at a few review sites, here are a couple of the good ones:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/, http://www.slrgear.com​/reviews/index.php, http://www.photozone.d​e/ and http://lenstip.com/len​ses_reviews.html

Thanks, thats why I'd be buying it as well. Do you have any shots taken at 2.8?

Yeah, I've looked around quite a lot, but there is so much conflicting info on the 3rd party lenses...

Thanks
Chris

Let me see what I can find. In the meantime, I'd suggest checking out this thread.

Thanks.

I'm having a look through this just now.

I don't really have any good examples on my computer at the moment, sorry about that.

As for conflicting third party thoughts, I wouldn't worry too much about them. On forums, you mostly hear the negative feedback towards a company as opposed to the positive. For every one bad experience (with focusing, for example), who knows how many good experiences there are. I know of a lot of people who have gotten third party lenses and have never had a problem. Of course, that's not saying that you'll be 100% free of issues, but just take what you see with a grain of salt.

Good for looking through the lens sample archives. I think they're a valuable part of this forum.

BTW, welcome to PotN! Forgive me for not saying that at the beginning.

Haha, thanks.

Thank you for the info, I'm going to make sure I do all my research before spending (for me) a lot of money.

You're welcome. Definitely a good idea! I'd suggest too, if you have access to a local camera shop, trying out the lenses that you're looking at. You can usually bring in your camera body and try on different lenses. Bring a CF card with you and when you go home, you can dump the pictures onto your computer and decide which you think gives you better IQ. Continue to use your 50 1.8 as well. Remember, if you do get a fixed 2.8 zoom lens, it won't quite have the low light capabilities of your nifty fifty. Maybe decide what FL you like a look into a prime lens in that area. (Sigma 30 1.4, Canon 85 1.8, etc.)