Canon Lens Question?

shachr6 · Sep 3, 2008

Ok so I want to get a new lens, I shoot mostly weddings, I want something to replace my Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8, and I dont want the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, how about some reccomendations?????

table1349 · Sep 3, 2008

shachr6 said:
Ok so I want to get a new lens, I shoot mostly weddings, I want something to replace my Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8, and I dont want the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, how about some reccomendations?????

What's wrong with the Tamron and why don't you want the Canon?

keith204 · Sep 3, 2008

tell us why you don't want the 17-55 2.8 IS. That's probably going to be a quick recommendation (would've been mine). The 24-70 f/2.8L is a great lens, but a little awkward range.

shachr6 · Sep 3, 2008

I find the Tamron isn't even close to the quality of pictures as my 70-200L so I wanted something closer to that, as for the Canon I hear of way to many problems to pay $1000 for it I would rather spend more and get something better quality. Just wasn't sure what was the best for that range?

Overread · Sep 3, 2008

well the canon 24-70mm L is often quoted as "the wedding lens" along with the 70-200mm series. After that there is the canon 24-105mm f4 L IS which has the advantage of longer focal range and also IS over the 24-70mm, but it is not as fast a lens (only f4 and not the f2 - which could be very important for weddings indoors when flash is not allowed/encouraged)

table1349 · Sep 3, 2008

Optically I love my Tamron 17-50 f2.8. It's the only non-canon lens I own. The build quality is average and the focus motor noisy but optically mine is outstanding. I would suggest that you go to a good camera store with you body and shoot a 17-55 f2.8 and the 24-70 from Canon and Sigma if available. Take a look at the shots and take home the one that satisfies you. I know several wedding shooters around here with the 17-55 on crop body cameras and they love it.

Big Mike · Sep 4, 2008

The 24-70mm F2.8 L, is often the wedding work horse lens...but not necessarily on crop bodies. I find that to be an awkward focal length, it's just not wide enough on a crop body.

I've seen a lot of discussion about the 17-55mm IS by a lot of wedding photographers. The consensus seems to be that the image quality is outstanding, worthy of L...but that it does have other problems like dust getting in and the IS system crapping out. A few photographers that I know, have learned to only turn the IS on, when needed.

I also have the Tamron and find it to be pretty good...but I can tell that it's not an L lens.

If you want as good or better quality than the Sigma...your other options are the EF 16-35mm F2.8 L and the EF 17-40 F4 L. Perhaps the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 but that's a lateral move.

shachr6 · Sep 4, 2008

Alright thanks guys i will prob go with the 24-70mm F2.8 L, I just dont want to take a chance on the 17-55, and then some day when I get my 5D im wishing i will still have it.