Reading mode: Light Dark

Alternative to Tokina 50-135/sigma 50-150 on 60D (not 70-200)

Go to last post
treepop

treepop

Leading Member
Messages
726
Reaction score
31
Location
US
I am looking for a nice telezoom with an f/2.8. The Tokina 50-135 looks like a winner, but unfortunately can't be found very easily. And when I do find it, people are asking for ~$900 used! At that price I would rather get a 70-200.

Any suggestions?

Thanks
 
treepop said:
I am looking for a nice telezoom with an f/2.8. The Tokina 50-135 looks like a winner, but unfortunately can't be found very easily. And when I do find it, people are asking for ~$900 used! At that price I would rather get a 70-200.

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
I'm considering the same type of lens. After doing some research I have found that people are generally very happy with their 50-150 but many miss stabilization. As sigma have announced the stabilized EX 50-150/2.8 OS model, I'm going to wait for it. For some reason pricing and availability dates are not yet published. May have something to do with the nikon lawsuit.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50-150mm-f28-ex-dc-os-hsm-sigma

I found the non-stabilized EX 70-200/2.8 II as low as 780 usd but I'm unwilling to lug around the heavy full frame tele, and I think I'd have more use of 50mm than 200mm.
 
I'm in exactly the same situation, trying to "upgrade" from my EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS. I also don't want the 70-200 range intended for full-frame bodies, way too big and heavy, and not wide enough on a crop body.

I really hope Sigma will release the OS version of the 50-150mm soon.

Why there aren't any more choices is beyond me.
 
andersf said:
andersf said:
I am looking for a nice telezoom with an f/2.8. The Tokina 50-135 looks like a winner, but unfortunately can't be found very easily. And when I do find it, people are asking for ~$900 used! At that price I would rather get a 70-200.

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
I'm considering the same type of lens. After doing some research I have found that people are generally very happy with their 50-150 but many miss stabilization. As sigma have announced the stabilized EX 50-150/2.8 OS model, I'm going to wait for it. For some reason pricing and availability dates are not yet published. May have something to do with the nikon lawsuit.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50-150mm-f28-ex-dc-os-hsm-sigma

I found the non-stabilized EX 70-200/2.8 II as low as 780 usd but I'm unwilling to lug around the heavy full frame tele, and I think I'd have more use of 50mm than 200mm.
Click to expand...
That looks sexy! I wonder how much it will run? Hopefully not much more that the 17-50 sigma, with similar optical quality :)
 
treepop said:
andersf said:
treepop said:
I am looking for a nice telezoom with an f/2.8. The Tokina 50-135 looks like a winner, but unfortunately can't be found very easily. And when I do find it, people are asking for ~$900 used! At that price I would rather get a 70-200.

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
I'm considering the same type of lens. After doing some research I have found that people are generally very happy with their 50-150 but many miss stabilization. As sigma have announced the stabilized EX 50-150/2.8 OS model, I'm going to wait for it. For some reason pricing and availability dates are not yet published. May have something to do with the nikon lawsuit.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50-150mm-f28-ex-dc-os-hsm-sigma

I found the non-stabilized EX 70-200/2.8 II as low as 780 usd but I'm unwilling to lug around the heavy full frame tele, and I think I'd have more use of 50mm than 200mm.
Click to expand...
That looks sexy! I wonder how much it will run? Hopefully not much more that the 17-50 sigma, with similar optical quality :)
Click to expand...
Is there anything currently on the market in this range with Stabilization
 
The Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM, and 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM II are avaibale in the market. They are quite a bit heavier though.

And that is about it, in the zoom range you look for. The 70-200mm f4 L IS USM is another, but its max. aperture is a stop less fast/bright.

If IS is not a need, and you want f2.8, get the Sigma. If IS more important than f2.8, get the Canon 702--mm f4 L IS USM.

Whether or not IS is needed/wanted for what you think you want to use the lens for, is up to you to answer.

Other lenses to consider: Canon EF 135mm f2 L USM, Canon EF 200mm f2.8 L USM II, Sigma 150mm f2.8 OS HSM macro.
treepop said:
treepop said:
andersf said:
treepop said:
I am looking for a nice telezoom with an f/2.8. The Tokina 50-135 looks like a winner, but unfortunately can't be found very easily. And when I do find it, people are asking for ~$900 used! At that price I would rather get a 70-200.

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...
I'm considering the same type of lens. After doing some research I have found that people are generally very happy with their 50-150 but many miss stabilization. As sigma have announced the stabilized EX 50-150/2.8 OS model, I'm going to wait for it. For some reason pricing and availability dates are not yet published. May have something to do with the nikon lawsuit.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/50-150mm-f28-ex-dc-os-hsm-sigma

I found the non-stabilized EX 70-200/2.8 II as low as 780 usd but I'm unwilling to lug around the heavy full frame tele, and I think I'd have more use of 50mm than 200mm.
Click to expand...
That looks sexy! I wonder how much it will run? Hopefully not much more that the 17-50 sigma, with similar optical quality :)
Click to expand...
Is there anything currently on the market in this range with Stabilization
Click to expand...
 
TangentZ said:
I'm in exactly the same situation, trying to "upgrade" from my EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS. I also don't want the 70-200 range intended for full-frame bodies, way too big and heavy, and not wide enough on a crop body.

I really hope Sigma will release the OS version of the 50-150mm soon.

Why there aren't any more choices is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Loving my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM, and never once missed the 50-70mm range!
And my standard zoom is Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC.

nope, don't need a moderate tele zoom to go wider. I would need a Sigma 50-150 to go longer though.
 
brightcolours said:
TangentZ said:
I'm in exactly the same situation, trying to "upgrade" from my EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS. I also don't want the 70-200 range intended for full-frame bodies, way too big and heavy, and not wide enough on a crop body.

I really hope Sigma will release the OS version of the 50-150mm soon.

Why there aren't any more choices is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Loving my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM, and never once missed the 50-70mm range!
And my standard zoom is Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC.

nope, don't need a moderate tele zoom to go wider. I would need a Sigma 50-150 to go longer though.
Click to expand...
It's more so the cost than the range. I don't need to pay for fullframe glass, and I need f/2.8 and IS.

I have considered the 28-75 Tamron, but the lack of IS and mere 20mm of additional range over my 17-55 doesn't seem cost feasible.
 
brightcolours said:
Loving my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM, and never once missed the 50-70mm range!
And my standard zoom is Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC.

nope, don't need a moderate tele zoom to go wider. I would need a Sigma 50-150 to go longer though.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, I do need the 50-70mm range because I go to fashion shows.

When the models are running up towards me to do the "money shot" pose at the end of the runway, I can only do half-body or head-shots at 70mm. 50mm is much easier to deal with still getting a full-body shot.
 
TangentZ said:
brightcolours said:
Loving my Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L USM, and never once missed the 50-70mm range!
And my standard zoom is Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC.

nope, don't need a moderate tele zoom to go wider. I would need a Sigma 50-150 to go longer though.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, I do need the 50-70mm range because I go to fashion shows.

When the models are running up towards me to do the "money shot" pose at the end of the runway, I can only do half-body or head-shots at 70mm. 50mm is much easier to deal with still getting a full-body shot.
Click to expand...
a 70-200 equivalent on a crop sensor is probably more convenient, so I too would rather have 50-150 f/2.8
 
Optically, which lens is better? The Sigma 50-150, Tokina 50-135, or Canon 70-200 Non IS Mark I?

The Tokina looks to lead this pack, followed by the Canon and then the Sigma. I could be wrong however. It's also hard to resist L glass ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
70-200 f/2.8 family
Replies
13
Views
3K
Scott Larson
S
D
135GM vs 50-150 f/2 GM vs Sigma 200mm f2
2 3
Replies
42
Views
13K
Dhomas
D
A
How big would an 18-50 2.8 full-frame lens be?
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
2ndact scene1
2
Sundre
  • User review User review
Sony 50-150/f2, a brief review
Replies
8
Views
3K
Impulses
I
Rohitash
Tamron 50-400mm and 150-500mm for Nikon Z mount
Replies
11
Views
7K
Randy_A
Randy_A

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top