DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Ready To Buy Another Lens... HELP
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 28, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/02/2005 11:02:48 PM · #1
I currently have the 18-55 II Kit lens, and the 50mm f1.8 II, and am looking for a fairly inexpensive everyday walk-around lens. I've narrowed it down to the Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM or the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC. The Sigma is a little more expensive, but I've heard good things about sharpness (important to me), and bad things about back focusing. I've generally heard good things about the Canon. Any ideas on which one, or is there a better one around that focal length and price that I should consider?
 06/02/2005 11:04:24 PM · #2
the range of the sigma is a lot better!
 06/02/2005 11:05:24 PM · #3
I had the Canon 28-105 and it's a great lens. I recommend it.
 06/02/2005 11:16:31 PM · #4
Nshapiro swears by the Sigma 18-125. My personal favorite is the $370 Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. It doesn't have quite the zoom range of the two you listed, but it's sharper than either and performs better in low light. The Tamron has replaced the Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM as my primary walkaround lens. Let me know if you decide on the Canon because mine (complete with lens hood) might be looking for a new home. ;-)
 06/02/2005 11:33:19 PM · #5
If you can't afford the Tamron 28-75, then I'd recommend the Sigma for the range. 18mm is really nice to have for a walking around lens. 28mm on a XT is more like 50mm. I don't know which one is sharper though.
 06/03/2005 09:09:26 AM · #6
Bump for advice from the day crowd.
 06/03/2005 02:46:58 PM · #7
How much do you have to spend?
 06/03/2005 03:06:51 PM · #8
Around $500 CAD, which converts to around 400 USD.

EDIT: I will also have to get the hood and filter.

Message edited by author 2005-06-03 15:07:21.
 06/03/2005 03:09:22 PM · #9
I should have asked these originally...

Do you want excellent quality, but less range, or are you happy for kind of ok quality, but further range?

For example,
Sigma 18-125 - nice and zoomy, not great quality
Tamron 28-75 - less zoom, better quality

Also bear in mind the Tamron is quite heavy, so will travel / walking around concern you?
 06/03/2005 03:20:05 PM · #10
Both ;). Actually, quality is important, and I would like around 100mm on the zoom range, and 28 is good on the wide. If I had to choose, I think I would go for the longer range, and ok quality. Of course I will test the lens, and if not happy with the quality, send it back.
 06/03/2005 03:30:44 PM · #11
Take a look at mid-range zooms on B and H

and then cross-reference them on

Fred Miranda Reviews

Bear in mind a couple of general rules:
- The larger the range, the lower the quality
- The larger the range, the more distortion

I looked up a couple of Canon lenses on PhotoDo:

Grade: 3.3 28-105/3,5-4,5 USM
Grade: 3.5 28-135/3,5-5,6 IS USM

Bear in mind PhotoDo is a somewhat outdated site. Surprisingly it shows the wider-range 28-135 slightly outperforms the 28-105. Those lenses come without a lens hood, but I'd be tempted by the 28-135, personally.
 06/03/2005 03:30:57 PM · #12
Are there any other type of photography other then the walk around variety? Usually the kit lens is decent for walkaround other then the speed it offers.

Do you intend to take people/street shots, archectural,etc? Possible something in the 200mm range zoom maybe good if you want to crop closer and get more into the details.
 06/03/2005 03:31:08 PM · #13
My favorite outdoor walk-a-round is the new Tamron 18-200 3.5
For indoors, I use the Tamron 28-75 2.8 I'm happy with both.
 06/03/2005 03:54:00 PM · #14
I don't think that the Sigma has HSM ( sigma's equivalent of Canon's USM ). If it hasn't , then the Canon 28-105 will focus significantly faster in comparison.
06/03/2005 04:09:51 PM · #15
Thank you all for your input. This is confusing. Each lens seems to have it's fans, and the reviews on-line are contridictory. I think I will look strongly at the Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM, the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC, and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which seems to get overall good praise, but is less zoom. I also have to factor in my budget when I add the filter and hood.
 06/03/2005 04:12:29 PM · #16
Don't forget to look at the Canon 28-135 USM IS.
 06/03/2005 04:14:07 PM · #17
for a walkaround the EF-S 17-85 IS is probably the best choice, it equals the 28-135 IS on a fullframe and is designed for the 1.6x crop SLR cameras. and is about $599, a $200 more than the budget, but worth saving for :)
 06/03/2005 04:14:50 PM · #18
Originally posted by Formerlee:
Don't forget to look at the Canon 28-135 USM IS.


I have, and it's out of my price range, but maybe I have to wait and extend my range. Maybe until I'm finished school, and get a job. Although that's when I was going to start saving for the Canon 100-400L.
 06/03/2005 04:17:43 PM · #19
Sent you a PM. :)
 06/03/2005 05:59:24 PM · #20
Originally posted by Minutia:
Originally posted by Formerlee:
Don't forget to look at the Canon 28-135 USM IS.

I have, and it's out of my price range

That lens is $409 on B&H.. Is that just outside what you've got? :-(
 06/03/2005 06:43:38 PM · #21
First of all, I suggest and strongly recommend the Tamron. I've bought two in the last month.

Second, if you NEED more zoom, save two more minutes for the 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM. The IS and zoom range are good for outdoors and walking (non-indoor, non-tripod) stuff. $409 compared to $350 isn't bad plus the Tamron is out of stock almost everywhere!! (I had LOADS of trouble locating two).

M
 06/03/2005 07:44:15 PM · #22
Originally posted by mavrik:
First of all, I suggest and strongly recommend the Tamron. I've bought two in the last month.

Second, if you NEED more zoom, save two more minutes for the 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM. The IS and zoom range are good for outdoors and walking (non-indoor, non-tripod) stuff. $409 compared to $350 isn't bad plus the Tamron is out of stock almost everywhere!! (I had LOADS of trouble locating two).

M


There's a little more difference in the price here in Canada. The Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM is $329.99, and the 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM is $649.99. I may have to look into shopping in the US, to see what the exchange and duty would be.
 06/03/2005 08:39:37 PM · #23
Originally posted by Minutia:
There's a little more difference in the price here in Canada. The Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM is $329.99, and the 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM is $649.99. I may have to look into shopping in the US, to see what the exchange and duty would be.


There is no duty on such items... However, if you purchase an item like this in the USA and take possession of it there, you will be required to pay state taxes. In addition, when you return to Canada, you will be required to pay the PST and GST on the total value of the item, namely the price of the item, including the taxes.

All factors considered however, if you shop carefully, it is still much cheaper to buy items of this nature in the USA.

Ray
 06/06/2005 10:44:15 AM · #24
Originally posted by Minutia:
Thank you all for your input. This is confusing. Each lens seems to have it's fans, and the reviews on-line are contridictory. I think I will look strongly at the Canon EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5 II USM, the Sigma 18-125mm f3.5-5.6 DC, and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which seems to get overall good praise, but is less zoom. I also have to factor in my budget when I add the filter and hood.


Each reviewer has thier own set of requirements for "what makes a good lens". So naturally, you're getting contradictory info. You have to give more info for a good answer:

1. do you want to add this lens to the 18-55, or replace the 18-55? That is, do you only want to cary one lens when you're walking around?

2. How important is the wide end to you? Look at the pictures you have now and see how much you use the 18-28 range. Do you need to take pictures of buildings from across the street? Do you need to take pictures of large groups of people in small rooms?

3. How important is the telphoto end? Sigma (and others) also makes an 18-200.

4. Is sharpness, speed, etc more important than a wide range? Do you use your 50/1.8 more than the 18-55 becase its faster/sharper/etc?

5. What do you expect your next camera to be? If it will use a sensor larger than APS-C, (e.g. the 1D-Mark II) you may want to make sure the lens can be used on a full-frame camera. Also, if you want to buy a film body, you shouldn't get EF-S or similar lenses.

Message edited by author 2005-06-06 10:45:37.
 06/06/2005 11:04:54 AM · #25
Good questions. Here are the answers:

1. It is to replace the EF-S 18-55mm kit lens. I'm not too happy with it. I may carry more than 1 lens, but the 18-55 probably won't be one of them.

2. The wide end is not so important. I am usually zoomed in past 28mm. I may add a dedicated wide-angle lens in the future if I need it.

3. The telephoto end is important for certain situations, but I plan to spend a lot on a good lens for that range. Maybe the Canon 100-400L. I don't want to go from 18-200 because you sacrifice quality in that zoom range (from what I've read).

4. Sharpness, speed, etc is very important to me.

5. As for my next camera, it may well be something like the 1D-Mark II (8.5 fps and I believe a APS-C sensor, the 1Ds-Mark II has a full size sensor), or whatever is the equivelent at that time.

All of this taken into account, I am strongly leaning towards the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF), and later when I can afford it, a Canon 100-400L.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/18/2025 05:49:16 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/18/2025 05:49:16 PM EDT.