chris.sager

<p>If i was buying such a lens today there woulld only be 3 lenses on my list.</p>

<p>1) Tamron 17-50 F2.8<br>

2) Tamron 17-50 F2.8 OC<br>

3) Canon 17-55 IS</p>

<p>I think this order fits from both a quality and cost perspective. When i made the choice 18 months ago the OC Tamron was not yet available. I went with the 17-50 F2.8 and am very happy that i did. Today i think i'd buy the OC version. Any of these lenses are perfect compliments to the 55-250, which i also own.</p>

<p>We wouldn't have hired you for our wedding!</p>

<p>We paid a flat fee for the 8 hour session with 2 photographers, image editing and delivery of all images in high res format (in this case 12-15 megapixel TIFFs). As described above the photographers offered all photo's on a self service website - they recieved orders for hundreds of prints (we bought about 50 ourself; our favorites and for gifts). We also ordered albums through the photographers. </p>

<p>All in all our total bill was thousands of dollars for an 8 hour 2 photographer day, 50 prints, 1 large and 4 small albums and a copy of all the images (on DVD actually).</p>

<p>When we hired our wedding photographer I specifically had in the contract an option to buy high res images rather than prints only. We paid significantly more than we might have had to for the flat fee, but in the end got what we wanted. <br>

We also ended up ordering an expensive album (and 4 small albums) and plenty of people ordered prints from them directly. I'm happy that i have full quality digital files that i can do whatever i'd like with!<br>

I would think it would make sense for all wedding photographers to have this as an option in the contract process.</p>

<p>I'm super excited about this camaera. The 40/50D was not enough of a departure from my 400D to convince me to upgrade. This camera makes all of my APSC lenses better and the new focusing/pentaprism/flash control features will all prove beneficial. I'm already starting to save. </p>

<p>My current 'Baby Kit' is an XTi, 50mm F1.8 and 430EX (100% bounced). I find this to be suprisingly perfect for indoor shots. I switch to my 17-50 or 55-250 for outdoor or well lit situations. <br>

You'll want shallow DOF for some shots (particularly sleeping shots). This cannot be replicated by any amount of light with an F4 or 5.6 lens. IS is of limited use. </p>

<p>I would seriously consider the Tamron 17-50 F2.8. It's more expensive, but offers a very usefull range on a crop camera. </p>

<p>I love my Tamron 17-50. Once you have a constant F2.8 you can't go back...</p>

<p>The Auto WB stinks IMHO. This is one place where Nikon has the advantage. I only use Auto WB but shoot RAW 100% of the time and therefor have no issues.</p>

Tamron FTW!

Here is the new Peripheral Illumination Correction:

 

 

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2027&productID=249&articleTypeID=5

Looks clear to me. We'll know everything tomorrow i bet!

The Tamron 17-50 F2.8.

I agree with Dave Redman. My current kit consists of 3 devices. I have a Canon Rebel XTi with two zooms and one prime, a Fuji F31FD and a Canon HV20 HD Video Camera. Whenever quality still images are my goal, i pick up the XTi, when i need to put something in my pocket (or my wife's purse) the F31FD is brought along.

 

There is no question that the XTi produces better results, even though the Fuji's sensor is one of the best every produced in a digicam. There are other times when the XTi is completely unpractical, where the Fuji is perfect.

 

This camera would not effectively replace either of my current cameras, and would most certainly not replace both.

The lens and flash hands down. There is no replacement for bounce flash. The 55-250 is great, and an excellent value IMHO. I liked my 70-200F4L quite a bit, and although its image quality is a bit better, the effective 3 stop IS and reasonable optical quality make the 55-250 the perfect choice on a limited budget.

I love my Tamron 17-50 F2.8 and will likely add the Tokina 11-16 at some point. These two lenses, along with my 55-250 creates a very competent, light weight kit that can be very usefull and wont break the bank!

Anyone think we'll ever see round sensors? It would seem possible even with today's 35MM optics.

Tamron 17-50 F2.8 for now, 24-105L for later.

I choose the 55-250 after previously owning the 70-200F4 Non IS.

 

I definitly made the right choice. In any daytime situation, the lens is great (no more than 1 stop slower). The build quality isnt as good, but it isnt terrible. I think if you would be planning on using this lens every day, i would definitly think about an L (maybe F4IS or F2.8IS). For vacation, candids and casual use, the 55-250 is an exceptional value IMHO.

 

Think about spending your additional savings on upgrading your wide zoom to the Tamron 17-50 F2.8. :-)

Assuming you have a crop sensor DSLR (EF-S) think about picking up a 55-250IS lens. Its less than $300, has surprising optical quality, and the IS works pretty darn well. If you end up using it frequently and want to upgrade it, i would bet you'd lose less than $75 selling it on eBay.

 

I have owned the 70-200 F4L in the past, and although it is certainly optically superior, for my purposes the 55-250 is equally useful and costs about half the 70-200F4L's price. I have also found that although there is no true replacement for large apertures, at 250MM F5.6 w/ IS on, i seem to get at least as many keepers as with the non IS L zoom.

 

I typically use this lens for family candids, shots of the dog and other general shooting. Most are taken with decent lighting without tripod. If its dark out i am limited to either my Tamron 17-50 or 50f1.8, but find that rarely am i hoping to capture shots in low light at above 50mm. If this is your goal, i would think about one of the Canon 70-200f2.8's or the off brand replicas.

Brad - i certainly thought of this as an option, but it appears most reputable etailers are also out of stock. B&H, Adorama, Calumet, Beach Camera and Amazon are all out of stock.

I know this is an odd question, but here does anyway.

 

I purchased a Rebel XTi, Tamron 17-50 F2.8, Canon 50 F1.8 and a 430EX recently. I purchased them all through

Dell (I have a wholesale account) and got the Tamron for roughly $320 (good deal). The lens is now delayed until

early August.

 

Normally this wouldnt pose an issue as I am realitively patient guy. I'm getting married a week from saturday and

was planning on having the gear for the honeymoon and for an uncle to take candids at the rehearsal dinner and

such.

 

SO. . . . Here's the question. I need something wider than 50MM to make the camera a bit more useful for the

honeymoon. I dont want to buy something in the 17-50 range really, as I had already decided to have the Tamron as

the lens in this range. When i buy a telephoto i think it will be the 55-250 as I think its a pretty good value after

taking some test shots at a local camera store.

 

My thoughts. Some sort of wide prime that would augment the 17-50 although i'm not sure which prime that would

be in the Canon world. Sure the 24L would be awesome, but as you can tell from my kit above, i dont have that sort

of cash to spend here. Another thought is the Tokina 11-16; stock is tight on these and this would be at the

absolute limit of my poor man's pre wedding budget.

 

Thanks everyone for the advice!

Read up on the Fuji F31FD. I love mine.

Don't rule out the 55-250 IS. I have owned the 70-200 F4L and used a 70-300 IS and 55-250 and will be purchasing the 55-250 for my XTi in the next few weeks.

 

I think its the best comprimse of the 3 comparing price, usability of IS and quality of images. Its not as sharp as the 70-200 by any means, but i'd argue its very close to the sharpness of the 70-300, is half the price (ish) and smaller and lighter.

The two leading single lens solutions are definitly the G9 and D40/18-200 VR combo. Canon doesnt have an answer to the 18-200 at any price at this time. It far outpaces the Sigma offering in quality & reliability.

The Tokina 11-16 is getting rave reviews as well.