F/2.8 Lens Ideas?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by keith204, Jul 12, 2007.

  1. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 that I LOVE.

    My wide-angle lens selection is limited though (stock 18-55 and a 50mm 1.8)

    My Goal: to get a full range of 2.8 lenses. (maybe). For instance, a 17-50ish 2.8, and then maybe a 28ish-100ish 2.8.

    Any ideas on lenses of this range? I currently shoot dirt track races at night--and hope to do sports soon-- so I need as much light as I can get.
     
  2. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,818
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    What's your budget and quality expectation?

    The best lens in this range is probably the Canon EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS...but it's expensive. Then there is the EF 16-35mm F2.8 L...which is also expensive but it's a 'full frame' EF lens and can be used as an ultra wide angle lens on film or full frame digital. Plus, it's an L lens...which means top quality and a cool red ring :D
    There is also the 17-40 F4 L....not F2.8 but a good lens.

    There is the Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and the Sigma 18-50 F2.8. Both are about the same price and much cheaper than the Canon 17-55. They don't have the Canon's IS...and maybe not the same image quality...but they are much better than the kit lens. The Canon also has a USM focus motor which is fast and silent.

    I went with the Tamron because it seemed to get slightly better reviews than the Sigma. I love it, it's a great lens. I would, however, upgrade to the Canon if I had the funds. Specifically for the IS and the USM focus.
     
  3. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I don't know exactly what I want :). but here's what I do know...

    I've had my eye on the Canon 28-135 IS for a long, long time. Lately I've been looking into the 30d, which convenielty can be packaged with a 28-135 and it will cut the costs some.

    However, is the 30D really worth it? Should I just stay content with my XT and invest in some 2.8 glass?

    I DO make money through taking pictures at the race tracks, and that's why I have a nice telephoto.
    I'd LIKE to get into some football photography this year, and my 70-200 will be a good lens for that.
    I'd NEED a better 'walkaround' lens for simply taking pictures of random things wherever I am. (I sold my 28-105 and sorta wish I hadn't... it was a good lens)

    So, my current plans
    1) Sell XT & 18-55
    2) Buy 30d & 28-135 IS
    3) Buy a wide-angle lens (f/4 or less hopefully) Mainly in the 17-XX range. Shoot, maybe i'll forget the nonsense and get a Canon 10-22.

    I'm just trying to figure out what to do. I have the money allocated to this (maybe not for step 3 yet) and i'm financially ready to make the purchase. However, I keep going back and forth, so I don't want to buy something I'll regret tomorrow.
     
  4. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,818
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I'm not sure how much benefit you would get by replacing the XT with the 30D. I guess if you shoot races...the 30D does have a significantly faster shooting rate...that would be an advantage. But if you are OK with using the XT for that job...then the money would probably be better spent on nice glass.

    Personally, I think that 28-135 is an odd range on these cameras. 28mm just isn't wide enough for me, for a walk around lens. I'd much prefer to have a 17 to XXmm lens...and you already have the Sigma 70-200...so that's a good combination, IMO.
     
  5. gryphonslair99

    gryphonslair99 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    11,441
    Likes Received:
    2,100
    Location:
    Wichita, Kansas, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Don't forget the venerable brick. Canons 24-70mm f2.8L. One of the finest pieces of glass Canon makes. Apparently a must for any wedding shooter. (Can't say for a fact, don't like and don't do weddings.).

    It's heavy and expensive but I love the thing.
     
  6. Jon, The Elder

    Jon, The Elder TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southeastern Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Keith....that is a combination that I use with great success. My wife loves hers and I use mine for a backup setup.

    A very underappreciated lens.
     
  7. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Man this makes things difficult. So, maybe I should look at the Canon 17-85 IS. My brother-in-law has it and loves it. That, and my nice 70-200 will cover my range perfect. Then, down the road I can look at a 24-70ish 2.8 to cover my low-light action shots. (maybe not that exact one---isn't it expensive?)
     
  8. Big Mike

    Big Mike I am Big, I am Mike Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2003
    Messages:
    33,818
    Likes Received:
    1,811
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I have the 'digital' version of that lens...the EF-S 17-85 IS. It's actually quite a nice lens. I've bean meaning to put it up for sale since I got my Tamron 17-50 F2.8...but I still find myself using it.
     
  9. Jon, The Elder

    Jon, The Elder TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southeastern Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Yup...seems like we are all on the same page pretty much. Now all we have to do is watch Keith spend his hard earned money. HaHa.
     
  10. keith204

    keith204 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Bolivar, MO
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I just don't know.. torn between the two. I'll probably end up just waiting with the equipment I have until I feel comfortable buying the 30D kit with the 17-85.

    Problem is:

    30D w/ 28-135 kit is $1,300 and
    30D w/ 17-85 kit is $1,600.

    That's a 300 buck difference. So, If I go 28-135 w/ 30D, then I later buy the $550 17-85 by itself, then it's only costing me $250 for the extra $17-85 lens.
     
  11. Photog38

    Photog38 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Colorado
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I hear you, and this is exactly what I am going through too.:???:
     
  12. Becky

    Becky TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    25
    Location:
    London
    I have the 24-70mm f2.8 ... its a fantastic lens, I couldn't recommend it more, its a right heavy lump though...
     

Share This Page