My Next Lens

AlexColeman · Feb 11, 2009

What is going to be my step up from the 16-85? I am curious about upgrading and wonder what my options are. I have no aversion to 3rd party lenses, as long as it is an actual improvement. I shoot alittle of everything.

anubis404 · Feb 11, 2009

The Sigma 18-50 F2.8 HSM is a HUGE improvement in image quality, sharpness, and speed as long as you don't mind the slightly less focal length. I have one and love it. The sharpness and bokeh is astounding. It also has 3:1 macro capabilities, and the close focusing comes in handy.

bdavis · Feb 12, 2009

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is also a solid choice, it's the main rival for the aforementioned Sigma and I believe might have a slight edge over it in terms of IQ.

AlexColeman · Feb 12, 2009

Great, any other recommendations?

Reel1 · Feb 12, 2009

I am looking forward to this one. It should be at retail stores in Canada in the next week or so.

SIGMA 24-70MM F2.8 IF EX DG HSM LENS

anubis404 · Feb 12, 2009

bdavis said:
The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is also a solid choice, it's the main rival for the aforementioned Sigma and I believe might have a slight edge over it in terms of IQ.

According to some of the tests I've seen, the Tamron is inferior to the Sigma in IQ and AF, however it has much less sample variation.

Mongoos3 · Feb 12, 2009

I suggest a 100-300mm zoom lens for cool "moon shots" or sports or events high up in the stands

anubis404 · Feb 12, 2009

Mongoos3 said:
I suggest a 100-300mm zoom lens for cool "moon shots" or sports or events high up in the stands

He owns a Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VR which in addition to producing a 105-300 crop factor, has far superior IQ and speed to any 100-300 on the market today.

Micah · Feb 12, 2009

I love my Sigma 17-70 f/2.8 but I have never had a Nikkor lens so I cant compare.

table1349 · Feb 12, 2009

anubis404 said:
According to some of the tests I've seen, the Tamron is inferior to the Sigma in IQ and AF, however it has much less sample variation.

For every test you can post that rates the Sigma above the Tamron I can post tests that rate the Tamron above the Sigma. Tamrons downfall is the noisy AF. Sigma's downfall is the poor quality control issues they have. Both are well thought of pieces of glass.

The only way to buy a lens is to go to a good photography shop with your gear and shoot it. Then take the lens you like the best. It shocks some die hard Canon only fans to know that I shot the Tamron against the Canon 17-40L and walked away with the Tamron. It was better than the Canon I shot. The Sigma wasn't out at the time I bought mine.

JerryPH · Feb 12, 2009

bdavis said:
The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is also a solid choice, it's the main rival for the aforementioned Sigma and I believe might have a slight edge over it in terms of IQ.

Nope, it does not. In 2008, 3 independant photography magazies *all* picked the Sigma 18-50 over both the Tamron and Nikkor 17-55 in areas of superior sharpness, IQ, lower CA and distortion. On top of that, the Sigma has a 3:1 macro... something neither lens has.

It is just awsome. This pic is basically SOOC from a D200 with the Sigma 18-50... you can clearly see the fingerprints on her fingers!

AlexColeman · Feb 12, 2009

That is a good suggestion, but we have no good camera stores here in Arizona. I don't know why, but it really makes situations difficult. Would the 17-55 from Nikon be a good choice?

:Edit: I just saw jerry's post. So the sigma 18-50 is even better than the nikon?

table1349 · Feb 12, 2009

AlexColeman said:
That is a good suggestion, but we have no good camera stores here in Arizona. I don't know why, but it really makes situations difficult. Would the 17-55 from Nikon be a good choice?

:Edit: I just saw jerry's post. So the sigma 18-50 is even better than the nikon?

I was impressed with Photomark at 2202 E. McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona. Don't know if that helps.