Budget lens for auto shots?

I'm looking at picking up a lens to use to take shots at car shows and other automotive events. The final shots would range from wide shots showing the full car at a 1/4 view to narrow shots focusing on paintwork/details with bokeh in the background.

The budget I'm setting for myself is $500.

The lenses I've looked at are:

1. Sigma 18-250 Macro OS f/3.5-6.3
2. Canon EF-S 17-85 ISf/4-5.6
3. Canon EF-S 18-135 IS STM f/3.5-5.6

I'm leaning towards the Sigma because I can use it in more situations than the others. I'm looking at the 17-85 because it has the sharpest focus of the three. And the 18-135 is a compromise between the other two.

Does anyone have any experience with these lenses to offer any advice on which they think would be the best solution?

mpiper wrote:

I'm looking at picking up a lens to use to take shots at car shows and other automotive events. The final shots would range from wide shots showing the full car at a 1/4 view to narrow shots focusing on paintwork/details with bokeh in the background.

The budget I'm setting for myself is $500.

The lenses I've looked at are:

1. Sigma 18-250 Macro OS f/3.5-6.3
2. Canon EF-S 17-85 ISf/4-5.6
3. Canon EF-S 18-135 IS STM f/3.5-5.6

I'm leaning towards the Sigma because I can use it in more situations than the others. I'm looking at the 17-85 because it has the sharpest focus of the three. And the 18-135 is a compromise between the other two.

Does anyone have any experience with these lenses to offer any advice on which they think would be the best solution?

Amongst all these lenses, what's wrong with the 18-55 IS? None of your suggested lenses are fast, and the 18-55 IS also has a pseudo-macro mode to get really close (1:3). If you want to complement this with a tele, the 55-250 IS would be recommended. These two lenses give you better IQ than the Sigma.

And will 17 or 18mm be wide enough for this, or do you need perhaps even wider?

I've used the Canon 17-85mm and its far from a sharp lens.

I've also used a Sigma 18-200 (similar to the 18-250) and its not a bad lens, good macro capabilities and fairly accurate focus. Its not the sharpest lens in the world, but quite a bit better than the Canon (in my opinion).

I've not used the 18-135 STM but I'd say its better than the other two and not at all a "compromise" lens.

Thorbard wrote:

I've used the Canon 17-85mm and its far from a sharp lens.

I've also used a Sigma 18-200 (similar to the 18-250) and its not a bad lens, good macro capabilities and fairly accurate focus. Its not the sharpest lens in the world, but quite a bit better than the Canon (in my opinion).

I've not used the 18-135 STM but I'd say its better than the other two and not at all a "compromise" lens.

I agree the only lens of the three that I would even consider buying is the Canon 18-135 STM.

Can you stretch to the 15-85 IS? Much better than the old 17-85 IS...

If you're looking for bokeh aka blurry background, you need something with a wide aperture like the 50/1.4 or perhaps the Sigma 30/1.4. Or maybe the 60mm macro? The slower zooms will not get you where you want to go.

brudy wrote:

If you're looking for bokeh aka blurry background, you need something with a wide aperture like the 50/1.4 or perhaps the Sigma 30/1.4. Or maybe the 60mm macro? The slower zooms will not get you where you want to go.

The 40mm f/2.8 pancake has a nice bokeh also.

mpiper wrote:

I have the 18-55. The 55 doesn't zoom enough to get the DOF bokeh that I want for the close ups. And it's not as sharp as I'd like. According to benchmark tests, all 3 are better for sharpness and bokeh

Are you talking about the old 18-55 non IS, or the 18-55 IS?  the 18-55 IS is a good lens.  And as pointed out by the other poster, none of the other lenses will give you better DOF really. And bokeh is not the same as DOF.    The only one that would give you better background blur would be the sigma at longer focal lengths at f5.6, but that lens will not be very sharp there, and you would have to stand far away.  Have you considered what distances you will be standing from your objects? What will dictate the focal lengths you want. Then you look at the max aperture you want for the DOF you want.  You might want to go for f2.8 or faster lenses, but depending on focal length, but may bust your budget.

Woody W. wrote:

Can you stretch to the 15-85 IS? Much better than the old 17-85 IS...

+1