I want to change the lens - need advice

[samal]

hello, here is another noob question

I am not professional, not even aspiring to be one, so the use is pure recreational/hobby. I have another really expensive hobby besides photography, so I have to balance my budget. I am discovering that what I like to shoot the most are the people, candids and staged, landscapes and occasional action scenes - dances, motorsport events and such.

I have XSi body and 50mm/f1.8 and sigma 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC OS as my walk around lens.

Recently after going to circus and some other poorly lit places, I discovered the limitations of my lenses and looking to improve my lens setup.
I was thinking of selling my 18-200, and my kit lens (18-55 IS) adding couple hundreds to that and hopefully have around 600-700 to play with.
I would want to get 2 lenses instead, - one - for a day to day - something like 24-70 and second in 70-300 length.
I am not looking for L lenses and such, I just can't justify such an expense for a hobbyist on budget.

i was thinking of getting something like Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG IF
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-28-70mm-Aspherical-Canon-Cameras/dp/B00063KO5W/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1227907175&sr=1-1[/ame]
or
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC SLD ELD
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-18-50mm-Aspherical-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000JDJJ82/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=photo&qid=1227907405&sr=1-1[/ame]

and something in 100-300 range with OS from Sigma or IS from Canon up to $350-400
maybe Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Canon-55-250mm-4-0-5-6-Telephoto-Digital/dp/B0011NVMO8/ref=pd_cp_p_1?pf_rd_p=413862901&pf_rd_s=center-41&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B0007Y794O&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0DJNP8ZCKJ28HYCNPN0Q[/ame]
or
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM if I can get a good deal or find it used in good shape
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-300mm-4-5-6-Lens-Cameras/dp/B0007Y794O[/ame]

I was reading reviews and opinions, but they are all contradicting and confusing, so I decided to ask here:

are any of those selections - "stay away from" or the opposite - "very good value for the price"

 

[Big Mike]

I think you would miss the wide end if you went with the 28-70mm lens (I know that I surely would)...so I'd suggest the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8.

As for the other lens, the problem with either of those lenses you mention, is that they have small maximum apertures, just like your current lens, so you won't really be much better off. Yes, adding IS to the equation would be benneficial...but IS really only help to counteract camera shake...if the subjects are moving (like at the circus) you will still get blurry photos.

The only way to freeze a moving subject is with a faster shutter speed...and you can get that with a larger max aperture. The trouble is that a telephoto lens with a large aperture is going to be big, heavy and expensive.

Maybe your budget would allow something like a 70-200mm F2.8 lens. Canon make it with and without IS, but both are rather expensive. Sigma (and Tamron too now) make a model that is less than the Canon...but still not cheap. Also, a lens like this might be too big and heavy for your 'hobby'.

Have you tried cranking up your ISO to get faster shutter speeds? This isn't the ideal situation because it makes for noisy/grainy shots...but that's better than blur.

The 55-250mm IS lens is rather new, but it does seem to be getting good reviews, especially for the price. Plus it's not too big or heavy.

 

[samal]

thanks, the more I read, the more I like this combo - Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS and Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC

oh, well, after I come from vacation in mid december, let the shopping begin! :blushing:

here is another option: Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL
[ame]http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm-Aspherical-Digital-Cameras/dp/B000EXR0SI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1227911368&sr=1-3[/ame]

How does it compare to sigma 18-50?

 

[Big Mike]

here is another option: Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL
http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-17-50mm...7911368&sr=1-3

How does it compare to sigma 18-50?

They compare very closely. I've got the Tamron and it's my primary wedding lens. If you go for the Sigma, make sure it's the newest version of that lens. They have older versions of the 18-50mm that aren't as good.

 

[RyanLilly]

The sigma and tamron are supposed to be equally good. I think the tamron has some slight advantages,so do a. Search for reviews. My sister has the tamron and it is a very good combination of quality and value.

As for a telephoto zoom, if you are considering slower glass, a used 70-200 f/4 is a very good choice over the others you have listed. The quality is top notch, and it's still two stops faster than your current 18-200.
- Ryan

 

[samal]

can anyone shed some light on this item that I just found? some say it's tamron in disguise...
http://cgi.ebay.com/Promaster-XR-EDO-AF-LD-17-50mm-f-2-8-for-Canon_W0QQitemZ200282549238QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamera_Lenses?hash=item200282549238&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318 - Promaster 17-50mm Digital f/2.8 XR EDO

 

[Prophet]

What am I missing here? Samal already has a 50mm f1.8 prime. Why are you stepping down to a 18-50mm when you have a 50mm to already cover that. Is this for portrait work or up close shots?

He has a reasonably fast telephoto that isn't cutting it for him and he wants something faster? Seems to me his needs out weigh his budget. He needs a good telephoto to reach out and touch that is fast. I'm cornfused.

-JD-

 

[Kegger]

He has a 50, true. But what about the wide end? That's where the 18-50 or the 17-50 would come in.

BTW, I have the Tamron and it's an amazing piece of glass, and like Mike, it is my primary family shoot lens.

 

[Prophet]

Btw, Sigma4less has the same lens for $40 cheaper.

http://sigma4less.com/sigma-zoom-wi...m-f28-ex-dg-autofocus-lens-for-canon-eos.html

-JD-

 

[JerryPH]

... and sigma4less is a reliable source to purchase from. That is where my Sigma 18-50 came from as well as my Nikon D700, accessories and Nikkor 24-70 lens.

Fast nice service and polite customer service when I called asking for stock info, ship dates etc.

 

[ksmattfish]

I think the f/2.8 normal zooms are a good choice (all of the brands mentioned make great lenses).

I'd do some testing to make sure the IS in those longer focal length zooms make a significant difference. The max apertures are about the same as the 18-200 super zoom. You may just have to bite the bullet and pay more for a long, fast lens. You don't want to waste $400ish to get the same performance as you've already got.

 

[samal]

50/f1.8 is an amazing lens for controlled situations, very versatile for light conditions but lucks the wide angle - it acts as 70mm with my sensor and in many cases I am running out of space indoors if I need to capture full height portrait or something relatively big. Also, luck of zoom makes this lens not very usefull when trying to capture my kids - they hardly stay in one place for more than a second or two.

i think I am going to stick to Sigma 18-50 since I already have a nice CPL filter in 72mm.

I am also shopping for Canon 70-200/f4.0 L

 

[jwsciontc]

why is the 55-250 in the list? you say u want more in low light situations, but your sigma zoom has better apertures for low lights (3.5 v the 4) not much better but still better, and the 55-250 is a pretty cheap lense. just my thoughts. i think the lenses you have are great. i can see where you would want more wide angles though instead of the constant 50mm of the nifty fifty

 

[JustAnEngineer]

Why is the 55-250 in the list? You say that you want more in low light situations, but your sigma zoom has better apertures for low lights (3.5 vs. the 4)...

Let's compare the maximum apertures of the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS and the Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS, and toss in the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, as well.

Focal length: Sigma 18-200 f-stop, Canon 55-250 f-stop, 70-300 f-stop:
18- 19mm: 3.5, x, x
20- 29mm: 4.0, x, x
30- 49mm: 4.5, x, x
50- 54mm: 5.0, x, x
55- 69mm: 5.0, 4.0, x
70- 73mm: 5.0, 4.0, 4.0
74- 79mm: 5.0, 4.5, 4.0
80- 84mm: 5.6, 4.5, 4.0
85- 95mm: 5.6, 4.5, 4.5
96-134mm: 5.6, 5.0, 4.5
135-139mm: 5.6, 5.0, 5.0
140-153mm: 6.3, 5.0, 5.0
154-199mm: 6.3, 5.6, 5.0
200mm: 6.3, 5.6, 5.6
201-250mm: x, 5.6, 5.6
251-300mm: x, x, 5.6

 

[samal]

JustAnEngineer, Thats a very useful info. Thanks

looking at this chart, I see even clearer that 18-200 has no chance.

Now, the real question I have ( I am getting more and more confused) would be:

is IS in 70-300 can compensate somewhat for being slower than 70-200 f/4.0 L? i can not afford IS in the L USM, and was shopping for a used one without IS for around $400

I think I can pick a 70-300 f/4.0-5.6 IS USM for about 300.
I will have longer zoom, and IS, vs quality of the glass and 1 stop faster at long end of 70-200 f4.0 L

How bad is the quality and the sharpness of 70-300 in comparisson to 70-200 L? is it worth $100?