Lens dilemma . . . . .

[trav383]

I am looking for peoples thoughts on an upgrade to the kit lens (18-55mm) that came on my 550d. I am torn between the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the*Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro and the*Tamron*17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF SP AF. I have read reviews on all three lenses and know that either lens will be a great upgrade, my worry is that the Sigma and Tamron lenses have some bad reviews from people that have had bad experiences.

[Professional]

Are those the only options you ended up with?
What is your budget?
What type of photography do you do to recommend you any lens?

The experience in life and photography world learnt me that i have to spend once even expensive and never look back.

If you buy one lens say at range of $800-2000, one lens only then you will thank your GOD you did, i sold some of my cheap lenses because i bought better optically quality lenses, all brands has from standard-average to high quality glass, and you get what you pay for, for me the lenses in range 20-150mm are the most used, i will recommend you to get Canon 24-105mm f4L if you are a Canon shooter, or Sigma 24-70, Canon has a decent lens for cropped camera which is EF-s 17-55, i heard amazing reviews about, sorry that i only posted for Canon because i use this system and no Nikon DSLRs.

Good luck!

[inkista]

Originally Posted by trav383

I am looking for peoples thoughts on an upgrade to the kit lens (18-55mm) that came on my 550d. I am torn between the Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the*Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro and the*Tamron*17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF SP AF. I have read reviews on all three lenses and know that either lens will be a great upgrade, my worry is that the Sigma and Tamron lenses have some bad reviews from people that have had bad experiences.

There are always going to be bad reviews on ANY lens. It's the nature of the beast. They can't inspect every single lens, and most folks only review one copy of that lens. Also, folks tend to be far more vocal about a bad lens online. Those people who get a good copy tend to spend more time out shooting with the lens than writing about it online.

In terms of which lens you want to go for, the first thing you need to consider is why you want to upgrade from the 18-55. Do you desperately want more max. aperture? Then the 17-50 is probably your best choice. Do you want more range? then the 15-85 is probably it.

If you just want a slightly sharper lens, then just learn to stop the 18-55 down to f/8. I would also advocate learning to shoot RAW and post-process if you want better saturation/sharpness.

I would also say, look again at the magnification numbers for the 17-70. It's more of an almost-half-macro lens (1:2.3), not a full-macro lens (1:1). If you're serious about shooting close up and getting in there, a dedicated macro lens would probably be a better bet.

[trav383]

To Professional,
I was looking for a lens with more focal range but not too much, have been reading that lenses with a much wider range lack in quality of the final product, and further down the track I would like to buy a telephoto lens so the range on the canon and sigma I have suggested will suit perfectly, but the tamron is a bit short, but I liked it because of it's constant f/2.8. I was looking to spend up to $1000, I realise buying an L series lens is the best for quality, but i'm just a hobbyist, so that sort of cash seems too much. I will be using the lens for functions, birthdays, wedding etc, photo's of my son and other family, and for travel. I realise travel is a broad topic, but just a lens that's a bit of an all rounder, any other suggestions will be greatly appreciated and I am using a Canon 550d, cheers.
To Inkista,
Thanks for your comments, I am looking for something a little bit longer and if possible, something a bit faster, so a mix of the canon and tamron would be ideal! I realise all lenses will have bad reviews from someone somewhere, and from what I have read and peoples feedback on a review site the tamron seems to be the better of the three, but I would like a little more in the focal range, like I said above, I hope to purchase a telephoto lens eventually and was hoping to get this lens so no focal length is left out (if that makes sense) have you any other ideas to throw in the mix, thanks again

[andrewdt]

Well if you are willing to spend up to $1000 then I would highly recommend the EF-S 17-55 2.8 - it is very good value for money, good build quality and great IQ. The constant aperture speaks for itself, it is fast, has IS and USM.

As for having a wider range, really to lose out on the 56-69mm range is no big thing, as most telephotos start at 70mm so when you do get one you will cover yourself there.

Be careful though, this 17-55 is much bigger and heavier than the 18-55 kit lens, so bear that in mind.

[Professional]

Thank you very much!

I really don't know what you mean by hobbyist? it is only a matter of money and need, not a matter of how is your skill level, i am a hobbyist and not a semi pro at all even yet and i have some Ls and even Hasselblad, does that mean i must be a pro to buy high end pro bodies?

I recommend you to spend your money once and wisely for long term glasses, with about $1000 you can get EF-s 17-55 or if you are lucky to get 24-105, you can find those lenses as used with good to excellent conditions with reasonable prices, even you can find EF 24-70L, if i have $1000 for a lens and i am just starting then i will but something worthy, not offensive for other brands or models of glasses, but you get what you pay for, so pay what is worth to get what is worth, don't look if you are just a beginner or a pro, the gear are not classified in the stores for your level, they will never reject me if i want to buy a $15k lens and i am just a beginner/novice/hobbyist.