Sigma 24-70 f2.8 or 18-50 f2.8

[waynelittle]

Hello all,

 

I currently have a 24-70 2.8 and I am happy with it. But being quite a

large lens I was wondering about the comparisons with the 18-50 2.8.

I would have a wider lens, still ok for portraits (80mm) and I believe

it is smaller and lighter. This would be a better walk around lens,

would it not ?

I do shoot some weddings and this would enable me to change lens's

less with the wide capability of the 18-50.

I also have to 70-200 2.8 for portraits. Would I miss that 20mm in

between?

 

Any feedback would be welcome.

[marknagel]

I had both lenses. I really liked the 18-50/2.8 better. It is smaller and lighter and my copies, it (18-50) was sharper. I doubt you'd miss the 50-70.

 

m

[jimstrutz]

If you are using it with a small format DSLR (20D, DRebel, etc.) then the the 18-50 is a better fit for an all around lens -- for most people. Some don't want or even like wide lenses. Totally strange folk to me, but to each his own.

 

I have the 18-50 f/2.8 and find it a very good lens. Some people have claimed to have autofocus problems with their copy, but it is very good for me.

[waynelittle]

Sorry, I forgot to mention I was using it on a 20d.

[yakim_peled1]

Do you consider going to FF or 1.3X in the near future?

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.