peterb1 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I know. Those questions are going all over... <BR> I would love to get Canon... but price is a bit over my budget right now. <BR><BR> I have:<BR> Canon 20D<BR> Canon EF 10-22mm<BR> Canon EF 50mm 1.8 II<BR> Canon EF 70-200mm 2.8 L IS<BR> I need something in 24-70 range<BR><BR> I am a bit spoiled by "L" glass...<BR> Tell me what you have and what to expect from.<BR> What could be your choice if you will have to buy again?<BR> Thanks for your time.<BR><BR> Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pto189 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 Ken will tell you to buy Canon. JoJo will tell you getting Sigma. Others will suggest Tamron. People don't buy the Canon for three reasons: expensive, heavy, and cheaper Tamron or Sigma substitute. If you can handle the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, the Canon 24-70 isn't heavy to you. The bottom line is money. I suggest that you wait until you save enough money for the Canon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ky2 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 You've been touched by L glass. Stick to L. L is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josh1 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I'd buy it again. This is my favorite lens on a film body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_nancarrow Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I am very happy with the quality, image and build of my Tamron 28-75 lens, it was 300.00 after rebate and is slightly sharper than my canon 70-200 IS at similar focal lengths wide open. It has very nice out-of-focus rendition. It also has a 6 year warranty. You already have many focal lengths covered with your existing lenses and there's not much reason to spend tons on the 24-70mm with a lens like the Tamron out there. That being said, I am quite sure that someday I will get the 24-70L, don't know why but I know I will, especially if they ever make it an IS. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiswick_john Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 The Tamron 28-75 is getting very good reviews - do a search and read up on this lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie g Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 On my 20D, I have owned both the Canon L and the Sigma you asked about. I first owned the Sigma and wanted to try the L so I owned both. Then I got rid of the L. The L is definately better at 2.8 but not $900 better. At f/4.0 or smaller they are nearly identical so definately not $900 better. At f/4.0 or smaller the L maybe worth $50 more. If f/2.8 is very important to you and you make money with f/2.8 then you may have to buy the L. But the reason you pay ~$900 more for the L is not because it's worth $900 more but because the L has a monopoly at f/2.8. At f/2.8 the L is worth probably $300 more throughout the entire frame not just the edges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pto189 Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 <i>At f/2.8 the L is worth probably $300 more throughout the entire frame</i><p>I think the L is worth $325 more than the Sigma, not $300. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknagel Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I went through 4 Tamron's to find an acceptable copy (3 were extremly soft and/or front focused). I had 1 Sigma and it front focused and was soft. I ended up getting the Sigma 18-50/2.8 which is very sharp. Its a good lens, but its my only non USM lens and I can't stand the AF inconsistancy. I'm selling it to buy the Canon 24-70L. If you are used to the speed and accuracy of USM, don't wast your time with the 3rd party. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnagex_carnagex Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 I tried out the Sigma 24-70, but ended up getting the Canon 24-70L because it had more accurate focusing (on a 10D), and better contrast, the build quality was great on both, and Sigma was better in the price range, but in the end the L won out.............................(and my view is not L bias, my favorite lens, and probably one of the sharpest lenses out now is the Sigma 150 macro, this I would pick up over any L) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 >> I need something in 24-70 range No you don't :-) 22mm is rather close to 24mm so that is covered. 50mm and 70mm are also nicely covered. What do you need, 28mm? 35mm? Get either the 28/2.8 or 35/2. They are small, cheap and optically excellent. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_austin Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 Whenever I'm using my 24-85, I find myself lusting for the non-existent f/4 version of the 24-70. (My other lenses are all Canon primes and (f/4) L zooms.) I may eventually just break down and buy the 24-70 f/2.8L, although I'd much rather have a smaller, lighter, slightly slower version of it. I've had enough minor, intermittent problems with my 20D and Canon lenses that I don't want any of the possible hassles with third-party glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham_gardner1 Posted June 29, 2005 Share Posted June 29, 2005 If you work as a pro, then the Canon is the only way to go, and when you come to sell it (or your children do) you/they will still get top money for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb1 Posted June 29, 2005 Author Share Posted June 29, 2005 Thanks to all. Still my hart is going to Canon L glass<br> but wallet not. I will have to pay visit to my Photo store<br> and just test Canon against Sigma. I want to see it.<br><br> I start having a bit problems with my 20D and 70-200mm 2.8 L IS.<br> Focus problem and Error 99 and lately F stops shows as 00<br> locking my camera till I power down and change lens....<br><br> (?)<br><br> Looks like it's time to test my camera by Canon...<br> for sure - after long weekend (in Canada)<br><br> Thanks to all for your time! Have a nice one.<br><br> Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Your problems with your 70-200 are well known - it is the lens, and not the body that needs to go for repair. Hopefully it is still under warranty, because Canon may well have to replace the IS unit, the aperture unit and the mount. Look at this veery recent thread: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00ChKM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_austin Posted June 30, 2005 Share Posted June 30, 2005 Earlier, I wrote: "I may eventually just break down and buy the 24-70 f/2.8L..." No, on second thought, I won't. I'll just keep my current kit unless / until something breaks, or until Canon produces any of the following lenses: EF 28mm f/1.8 II USM EF 50mm f/2.5 (or faster) Compact Macro USM EF 24-70mm (or 28-80mm) f/4L IS USM EF 70-200 f/4L IS USM Thank you, I feel much better now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabrielma Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 Peter: try the Tamron 28-75 XR Di; it's really nice. The L glass is better, but the Tamron is so darn close, you may want to spend the difference on, oh, maybe the Canon 50 f/1.4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gene_austin Posted July 5, 2005 Share Posted July 5, 2005 As a fellow 20D owner unless you really need f2.8, I would get the 17-40 4.0L and call it a day. I love mine and its much lighter than the 17-35 2.8L. You have the 50 1.8 and 70-200 2.8L already and I really don't think you'll miss not being able to zoom between the 40~70mm range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark from thailand Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I'm in similar position, having bought a 70-200 F4 L for my 350D. I love the quality of this lens & am now looking at the 24-70. The price IS a big problem, although EVERYONE says it is a wonderful lens. Another surprising issue is how the price varies (I live in Thailand, so will not buy from Thailand) USD 1100 in US USD 1370 in Singapore USD 1650 in UK ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now