Canon EF-S 17-55mm VS Sigma 17-50mm VS Tamron 17-50mm?

qianp2k wrote:

amosf wrote:

I was starting to think he worked for Canon, the way he says to avoid third party lenses (which are often great value and IQ) - but then he recommends off brand flashes.

I am puzzle for third party flashes as well. They are cheaper sure but taking noticeble longer time to recharge in general and quesionable reliability working with ETTL...Not worth for me. I picked up Sigma 17-50 over Canon 17-55 is basically $400-450 difference on brand penality but virtually identical IQ on top of $600 that is a no brainer.

New Sigma lenses are excellent in its elite EX series as we have seen in 85/1.4 and new 35/1.4. Check these two new lenses (both are updated versions).

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/01/08/Sigma-CES-2013-DP3-Merrill-17-70mm-F2-8-4-120-300mm-F2-8-Sigma-Photo-Pro-Mono

To OP: This new 17-70/2.8-4.0 OS 2nd edition probably also deserves a look. It has 20mm more at tele side from 17-50. First edition is not very good , wait and see this 2nd version. Sigma now gives a USB dock station so you can update firmware down to the road for bug fixes or new camera bodies.

I'm sorry but that's bogus. Light is light you can not say the same thing about lenses. I've used my Yungnuo 560 II paired with a Canon 580EX and the recharge time with my Yungnuo is actually faster and this is a fact as you can look up the reviews for the flash.

My Yungnuo with good battery's (eneloops alkaline) recycle instantly up to even 1/4th power.

I had more trouble waiting for the Canon flash to recycle as it was being used for bounce and the Yungnup as bounce on an umbrella for group shots at an indoor gig I did a week ago on New Years Eve.

I also avoid ETTL as it results in inconsistent results (it rely's on in camera metering, it's compared to using auto mode on your camera and your photos will be inconsistent vs using manual and learning to use your flash and understand guide numbers or just getting a feel for your flashes power.)

I'd never go with third party lenses though, Canon makes excellent glass and their lenses hold their resale value the best and they have the least amount of QC issues. Sigma has a ton of QC issues hence why the term the Sigma lottery was coiced and Tamron has less of a lottery with their lenses but they are also of a much lower quality compared to both Canon and Sigma hence why they produce the cheapest third party lenses.

By the way you paid $600 for a lens that is soft at 2.8 and has issues with the edges at 2.8 and even stopped down a little. The Canon has 5mm extra reach and is sharp corner to corner wide open, doesn't produce a yellow color tint that the Sigma is known for, has a higher resale value, and has better optics/produces more desirable bokeh.

I'd never recommend a variable aperture lens for what he's shooting either. They're a PITA to work with especially combined with flash.