Lens choice

[BertRoot]

Am after a new lens to replace my 18-55 which I got with my 300D some time ago.

The choices are -

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 ex dg

or

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f4-5.6 IS USM

or a dedicated MAcro lens such as

Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM EF Lens

I love macro shots and would probably make reasonable use of the 100mm but ideally want a walkabout lens with good quality glass and a little more length than the 18-55.

Any advice guys?

[{{909}}]

specs wise the sigma eats the canon for breakfast. the other you cant really compare as its key asset is macro. Id get a top end walkabout lens over a specialist macro/portrait lens first, then expand from there.

You may find the 24mm end of the Sigma isn't as wide as you would like, but from owning it myself I havnt met any problems. The 82mm diameter of the sigma is so big you'll fool everyone into thinking you're a pro too, I did a portrait shoot with it and I had everyone eating out my hand, asking me how much I got paid etc

[BertRoot]

The thing that puts me off the Sigma is the size of the front as even a UV filter for it is an outrageous price and I would need something to protect it so wouldn't get away with having it on its own. I have read a few things saying that the Sigma is very heavy as well.

The IS element of the Canon tickles my fancy.

[muttleymacclad]

Hi bert

I've got this lens, and use it as my walk around lens. http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lens...es/17-70mm.htm
Very nice piece of kit and would suggest getting a zoom lens rather than the dedicated macro, you'll get much more use from it than the macro. It's got a 72mm diameter lens so filters from and not as heavy as the 24-70mm.

hvstar aren't too bad for filters, got all mine from here.

Even for an 82mm UV filter they're only $35
http://hvstar.net/index.asp?PageActi...ROD&ProdID=229


The 24-70mm looks good with f.2.8 though.

Must admit I'd love a lens with IS too.

MML

[{{909}}]

It is heavy bert, but I wouldn't say its too heavy, takes a while to get used to but after that lighter lenses feel a bit cheap.

[DB]

Bert this version has £69 off at http://www.warehouseexpress.com/?/ph...Sigmalens.html

24-60mm F2.8 EX DG (77mm) -----£199.99

[neo2810]

Bert, whats your budget mate?

[BertRoot]

Cheers DB. I saw that but fancy the 70mm to be honest. Dunno when I will get it but need to flog my 18-55 and a couple of other things to keep the purchase under the radar. ;-)

My old man has the 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro and that is a nice short lens, very sharp indeed. I don't really need one that short tbh so I think the 24 - 70 will do me.

Bert, whats your budget mate?

In reality probably about 200 mate.

[[wingnut]]

The sigma lens is the only logical choice in my book, always have used Sigma and never had a problem, as for the weight issue I have never thought "oh this lens is heavy" when i am carrying around a bag full of flash gear, spare lens, filters, batteries, memory cards etc etc.. Filters are pricey for the 82mm size but my pm may help

[BertRoot]

To be honest I am swinging towards the Sigma at the moment but everywhere I read up about it all I hear is things like 'I was lucky to get a good copy first time', 'first was rubbish but a replacement from Sigma cured it' and stuff like that and complaints that it is really loud while focussing. I don't really want to fanny about with an item that has poor quality control and have to send it back as I will probably buy it from HK.

[{{909}}]

It does seem to be a common thing that Sigma lenses are a little hit and miss, but bear in mind that 99% of the problems with a product end up as 99% of the information about it online. I may have been lucky but mine was perfect from the offset.