So I'm desperate to get a new lens for my cam (3 actually but 1 at a time)

Could I have some views please. Either views in experience or just from your outstanding knowledge or you could even do more research for me wink

The lenses in question are:

Sigma 17-70mm lens for digital SLRs   vs   Canon EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Sigma 10-20mm F4 - 5.6 EX DC HSM   vs   Canon Canon EF-S 10-22mm

 Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX DG MACRO  vs   Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro

And the question is - should I be looking at Tamron lenses too?

Thank You in advance for any help.

P.S. Cam is a Canon 350D

I own the Sigma 10-20mm F4 and use it on my own Canon 350D and I love it!  It is a beautiful lens, well built and very clear.  I also like the fact that the lens is built so that even if you have auto focus selected you can use the manual focus ring to overide the auto focus without straining or damaging the lens motors, its a nice feature.

Oh that does sound handy, my stupid kit lens moves while in auto while I'm replacing the lens cap and even thou it moves like 2mm, I'm so scared it's screwing it up, the lens lock is non existant!!!

I haven't taken any shots in 2 weeks coz I'm fed up with the quality of the kit lens, my cheap Sigma 70 - 30mm produces a better quality!

my kit lens was fine when i had it, although i might say different now.

Anyway - i would go for the sigma 10-20 in that category - cheaper and by all accounts not worth the extra money to get the canon, although as always there are people who disagree.  Check out www.fredmiranda.com for a few reviews (although i think you may have done so already - i replied to your question last night in another thread). Oh and the EF-S cant fit on a 5d or 1D shoudl you ever upgrade, the sigma can and apparently yields good results even on the full frame.

The "walkabout lens" category - have you considered the EF-S 17-85mm IS USM? i have it and it is a great lens - albeit not as sharp as my 50mm prime but that is only normal - all of those beach shots in my gallery were shot with that lens and most of them at the 17mm end. The IS is a lifesaver sometimes and fits well if you like walking around shooting hand-held.

As for the macro lens - i have heard that the 50mm's arent amazing, plus you need to get up close and personal to what you want to shoot. But then the field of view is wider and that might be what you want. It is all up to personal preference i suppose.

One thing i can say is to try out each of the lenses in the shop with your camera attached - take a few shots... walk out of the shop and have a look back home. Have a look for yourself as to the build quality the operations of the lens and then you get to see the shots you took with each.

I did have a look at the site and most of the lens 'reviews' I looked at rated the lenses between 7 and 8, is that a fair rating for 'amarture lenses' vs L pro lenses?

Tx for that link BTW :biggrin:

I'm worried about the EF-S lenses thou incase I do upgrade one day - then I'll be screwed, that's one reason why I was leaning towards the Simga DG lenses as is my current 70 - 300mm.

Any more thoughts anyone?

how much are you willing to spend? because the way i look at it is: buy the best you can afford and you will never be disappointed... if that is a pro level lens then so be it... no upgrading needed later on ;)

I'm going to be forking out £500 on a new lens (onestop digital is my saviour - the lens costs about £620 domestically) in about 2 weeks and that is basically because i know that it will be a great asset in my lens bag for years to come.

Hi some good advice given.. . I would like to know what sort of images you are hoping to use the new gear for?  Rich brings up a point I have also often mentioned regarding future Camera upgrades, as you may end up as I have done having to get rid of perfectly good lens that will not work.. 

Your max amount you can spend is also worth knowing? 

I have not tried the 17-70 lens I  have the 17-40 and   24-70 L both are superb but of the two you chose I would go for the Canon
 
The Sigma 10-20 is a cracker for the money as you can see by all reviews I have read.. And in my view is probably better than the Canon equal of it.. 

The 50mm Macro I would give both a miss!! You would be better with any of the 90-105mm Macro range  from Sigma 105mm  Tamron 90mm or the 100mm Canon my own choice.. These will allow you to be further away.. And if you need 50mm go for the Canon 1.8

My budget sucks - I want money for travelling but what a good lens to go with it, hance good lens at best price.

I want the Super wide angle, 1 coz I have an APS-C censor and 2 coz I want to use is for my architecture photography.

I want the standard zoom as a new walk around coz I'm seen just how shitty the quality of the kit lens is

I've seen the light

I would say for the standard lens budget: £260 max and the Wide angle: £280 (300 pushing it).

I am willing to buy on ebay from the US and pay for del - obviously if it works out cheaper and the dealer is reputable... But in the end that'll prob just be too much trouble.

P.S the Macro is not a must right now as that'll be for art and abstract.

The one I REALLY wanna buy now is the standard zoom.

I have the Sigma 10-20 and regard it as the best lens in that category bar none.  
One point I would like to make though is I would be very wary of attempting to put an EFS lens on a camera that is not designed to take it. The 'S' stands for short back and the lens will protrude into the body of the camera. I would expect it to do serious damage to the mirror and its mechanism if an EFS lens were fitted to a Canon 5D.  I would like to see first hand evidence from anyone who has done this before I would try it. As for getting a good image with it - no way the image circle produced by the lens will not cover a full size sensor. You would not just get vignetting you would get a definite dark border around the image. I don't know your sources Rich but I would check out anything they say and be suspicious. 
Right the good news You won't want to fit a a 10-20 lens onto a full frame camera these lenses are only that wide because of the smaller sensor size.  If you do purchase one of the super wide lenses in the 10-20mm range then regard it as a specialist lens for a C size sensor camera, they are worth it, you can get some crackin' shots with this range. 

The macro I am with Danny I would rather buy a used one around the 100mm mark than spend on a 50mm that will have very limited use. 

I left the walkabout lens till last because I think it is the most difficult.  Danny has mentioned 24-70L - A superb lens but it costs a packet and weighs in heavy for a walk about lens. Sigma do a version too it costs less than the Canon but is not quite so good, though a lot better than your kit lens.(mpb used at £179 which could be worth it)   He also mentioned the 17-40 again another brilliant lens though I would say a bit short for a walk about.  I have a Canon 17-85 it is a good lens though expensive for what it is and it is an EFS fitting.  Not sure in this category what I would chose. Perhaps look at the Canon 28-135 IS - lightweight and regarded by many as the best general walkabout lens Canon make. (mpb used @ £229)

hth

"Oh and the EF-S cant fit on a 5d or 1D shoudl you ever upgrade, the sigma can and apparently yields good results even on the full frame."

I'm agreeing with you Richard ;)

And here is mbp - they had a 10-20 for £249 last time i looked, but if you want a new one you are paying £264 at onestop digital (which is what i am going to be doing):

http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=26&category_filter=41

OK Rich -  sorry I'm just confused.

Quote from Sigma Imaging UK Web site: 

Use is not possible for digital single-lens reflex cameras with image elements larger than the APS-C equivalent size, 35 mm single-lens reflex cameras, and APS film single-lens reflex cameras. 

hrm - that is interesting, i was under the impression that from 12mm upwards the lens functions fine, and lower than that it just has a circular image like a fisheye.  There is no problem with the mount - the sigma lens canon mounts are all (as far as i know) EF and not EF-S.

you guys are fantastic tx for the help, I think I'm gonna go and try out the Sigma's at a shop tomorrow and see wat quality those produce... I don't have the money to buy L glass. I will be looking at the 18 - 70mm i think) from sigma too, but bar none I'll be getting something that fits in my pocket and doesn't make my 350D too front heavy...

The Sigma DC lenses are specifically make for APS-C Censors but can be used on full frames with vidging of course... I would love to get an EF or DG lens thou so that should I ever have the money to upgrade bodies, lenses won't be an issue...

Yaguar/Joe told me that you can use the EF-S lenses on a 5D, he was one of the first ppl that I asked coz he has got the most kit out of everyone I know...

I have both the Sigma 50mm macro and the 105mmMacro.  With my shots at work, the field of view of the 105 forces me too far back to use the light box!  I think both of these Sigma macros do a fine job.  Yes, the 105 gives more working room, albiet not a great deal more.  Yet, when I put on a macro, it is almost always the 50mm.  The lens works well for general  non-macro shooting as well,  with a crop factor of about a 75mm lens with my Nikons.   The 105 is too limited in field of view for my general "non zoom" shooting with the crop factor of about 158mm.

I cannot comment on the other lenses, not having a Canon camera.

Attached Link: Photozone

I think Joe is wrong here  with regard to the EFS and the 5D as the rear elements of the EFS lens protrude into EFS mounting if you try them they can foul the mirror and result in expensive repair bills.. Canon are quite clear that the EFS range of lens are only suitable for the cameras as stated.. The EPS size as little to do with it as in fact the 10D will also not function with these lenses as it too has not had the camera internals modified to fit the EFS lens, the mirror and Prism has had to be modified on cameras like the 20D and 30D, which have a less bright viewfinder..

tx dan

@ oldworld - I'll def check out that link.

I tried out the Sigma 10 - 20; 17 - 70 and 24 - 85 yesterday and I must say I was impressed, the Canon 10- 22's zoom was quiter and smoother but the Sigma's quality def looked crisper