qianp2k
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 10,350
Re: Canon EF-S 17-55mm VS Sigma 17-50mm VS Tamron 17-50mm?
William DIllard wrote:
psychoticpanda wrote:
I need help deciding on a new better quality kit lens...
I am shooting with a 60D that I just got so I'm sticking with a crop lens to get the full wide angle that I need. Please help me pick (with evidence why) between the three lenses.
My budget is about 1000-1500$ but I also want a new Canon flash... Do you think I should go with the Canon and wait for more money to get the flash or sacrifice IQ for a third party brand? Or is the third party somehow better for cheaper? Please help never bought any third party lenses before! I am open to any suggestions, but please keep in mind I would it for everyday use (landscape/portraits) and I prefer a wide angle since I don't have any good quality wide lenses.
- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens (999$)
- Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD (619$)
- Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 SP XR Di II VC (549$)
All of these prices are from Amazon, the Tamron has a 100$ mail in rebate offer.
PS: I would like to use the lens for some video also... But, mostly photographs.
THANKS FOR THE HELP!
Without a doubt the Canon 17-55 is the best lens mainly because it yields the best bokeh for portraits and it has IS but the Tamron 17-50 is a lens to love. I got rid of mine because I went full frame and I needed some cash and it was not worth it. It was such a fun lens to use and it has wonderful IQ with it's own unique look. If you are a serious portrait photographer get the Canon but on the other hand you won't be unhappy with the Tamron either, IS or non Is models.
You even didn't mention Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS as it doesn't exist, kidding In reality it's as sharp as Canon copy. At F2.8, Canon is slightly sharper in edges while Sigma edges out little bit in center. A few reviews I quoted in my first post summarized very well.
Everyone has reason to pickup a lens on his/her priority (as your chose 17-55/2.8 IS while MAC picked up 15-85). The reasons I chose Sigma are - a) it's almost $450 price difference then on two very similar lenses so no brainier after I carefully read above reviews (also reviews in Amazon); b) I have 70-200L/4.0 IS already so they complement each other very well; c) I usually don't like variable F zoom; d) 60D and this Sigma are only my backup camera while I am mainly FF shooter and already used 5D with 24-105L for years before bought 60D and this lens; e) and the most #1 is a F2.8 constant zoom for low light.
Canon EF-S 17-5/2.8 IS and Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS are two very similar lenses with very similar performance. If money is not an issue, go ahead for Canon otherwise Sigma (its build quality is excellent); Or EF-S 15-85/3.5-5.6 IS for one lens for all convenience that is similar to EF 24-105L on FF bodies.