Need a relatively cheap wide-angle portrait lens

[ClayScots]

Hey, all!

I am in the market for a new Canon camera lens (for a crop sensor camera, the EOS Xti), and I would love to find a high-quality wide-angle lens for portraits. However, I have little experience with these lenses and would love some insight into which one I should buy...but there's a catch. I only have about $500. And I also need to replace the kit lens that broke over Christmas. Is there a way to combine a wide-angle with the higher utility and range of a kit lens?

Thanks so much!

[autofocus]

(208 reviews)

Tamron




Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS Digital Cameras


$459.00 B&H Photo

[ClayScots]

That looks like a phenomenal buy!

Thanks so much for the tip!

But would it be preferrable to wait and drop the big bucks on an "L" Series Canon lens?

[autofocus]

Originally Posted by ClayScots

That looks like a phenomenal buy!

Thanks so much for the tip!

But would it be preferrable to wait and drop the big bucks on an "L" Series Canon lens?

Clay I believe you wanted a wide lens to not only replace your broken 18-55, but also one that could be used for portraits..all for $500, or less. You never mentioned the possibility of saving for an L lens??? If you need a quick replacement within your budget, this lens fills the bill with a big plus..it's a fast constant F/2.8 to boot.

[ClayScots]

Saving for an L Series was just an afterthought, really....

Thanks for the tip!

[inkista]

Yeah. "relatively cheap" and L don't go together. Even the old used Ls are still costy.

And whether or not going for an L is better depends on a number of factors, like how quickly you can save up the big bucks required to get one, whether or not you can actually see the difference, whether your expectations of an L lens are set realistically (they're still lenses, they're not magical tools that instantly make everything beautiful), the lens you're replacing with an L, if you shoot (or plan to shoot) with a full-frame body, and whether or not you like shooting with big, expensive, heavy lenses that are conspicuous as hell.

Ls are great lenses. But they're not for everyone, and the buyer's remorse can bite especially hard when the price tag gets that high. And while an L might cost three times more, it won't be three times sharper or anything. An L can be only a marginal improvement over a gold-ringed USM counterpart, especially when it comes to sharpness.

[TheEagleSpirit]

Originally Posted by autofocus

Clay I believe you wanted a wide lens to not only replace your broken 18-55, but also one that could be used for portraits..all for $500, or less. You never mentioned the possibility of saving for an L lens??? If you need a quick replacement within your budget, this lens fills the bill with a big plus..it's a fast constant F/2.8 to boot.

I agree on the Tamron F2.8 17-50 mm lens, I have one with the Nikon mount and love it. I also have a Tamron F2 60 mm lens in about the same price range only with macro. The quality of the Tamrons are excellent.

[Thunder_o_b]

Originally Posted by autofocus

(208 reviews)

Tamron




Zoom Super Wide Angle SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical [IF] Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS Digital Cameras


$459.00 B&H Photo

I have the non IS version of this lens and my wife has the IS one. The reports show the IS one is a little less sharp than the non is, but they are both rather soft at f2.8 We have found this to be absolutely true. They are "good" lenses between f5.6 and f.11, if that is where one intends to shoot, then it may be a good choice. But I will not purchase another Tamron myself.

Also watch the front element, after a year of field use, it suddenly got so loose it was about to fall off. Just a heads up.

After living with these lenses for a year I have come to two conclusions:
1. I have had better results with my Sigma lenses.
2.I am going back to primes.