replacing 18-55 IS Kit Lens

looking to upgrade my kit lens. my budget is about $500.00

im currently looking at:
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II
Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM


Does anybody currently have one of these lens and would like to share your experience?

i don't have any of those, but i would like to share my experience.

i shot with that kit lens for almost the whole first year that i had my camera. then i got a 50 1.4 for $325 bucks. im pretty sure i learned more in the couple months after i had the 50, than the whole time prior. plus i think it made me be more creative.

so, i suggest you get yourself a fast prime. i guess it doesn't have to be a 50mm exactly, but boy i sure do love that lens

S2K.OGRAPHY wrote in post #9859841
i suggest you get yourself a fast prime. i guess it doesn't have to be a 50mm exactly, but boy i sure do love that lens

im also currently using a 50mm 1.8 mk1. thanks for your input.

I don't have any of those, but I'd lean toward the constant 2.8 if you do much low light at all. I've heard good things about the Tamron 17-50 as well, it seems to get good reviews.

macftw85 wrote in post #9859835
looking to upgrade my kit lens. my budget is about $500.00

im currently looking at:
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II
Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM


Does anybody currently have one of these lens and would like to share your experience?

I have the Tamron 17-50 2.8 (non-vc) -it's a good upgrade from the kit lens, f2.8 is very sharp at all focal lengths

has anyone used the sigmas?

I have the sigma 24-70 2.8 EX DG and Im considering swaping it for the 17-70. Havent really maid up my mind on that one but I can tell you the sigma I have was a significant jump over the kit lens.

i almost got the sigma 17-70 to replace my kit lens if it weren't for the good deal i got on my 17-85. from what i've read about them i'd say either of the first two and you won't be disappointed.

i would go with the tamron 18-50 f/2.8 just for the fact that its a constant f/2.8

I've tried the sigma 18-50 and tamron.

Tamron is a little sharper, the zoom ring rotates the opposite way from usual canon lenses. I just found that a little irritating because I always forget and with my other lenses I always start turning the wrong way and vice versa. Caused me to miss a shot here and there. Also the AF is a tad bit louder.

Sigma is nice with a quieter/faster AF I feel. I've had good copies of sigmas, but I've also read where their quality is really hit or miss. You either get a really good lens or one that's just not up to par.

After all said and done I have a 17-40mm L that's on my camera 80% of the time, basically replacing my kit lens. I hope to go FF in the future then I can use what the 17-40mm was made for, but I think that even if I don't it fills that range pretty nicely on a crop. It's a shade more but the build/functions of the lens is just on a different level.