[warnsey]

Thanks for the recommendations. I do mainly landscape work so a wideish 17-50 could be the go. How is the Tamron better quality than the the Sigma or the Canon?

There's just to much to choose from.

 

[lan]

The way I understand most landscape shots are they use wider angle and they are stopped down.

Maybe a priority for you:
- colors
- edge sharpness
- distortion
- chromatic aberation

Maybe not a priority
- f/2.8 / wide open performance

The Tamron lenses I mentioned have nice colors and good resolution. I'd just go to a photo forum and look at photos taken by various people with certain lenses to get a general idea of the kind of images you could possibly get. Specs are specs but images are more important.

---------------

On another note, I'm returning this 18-55 IS. Wide angle is doo-doo

I only cared about it's performance 18-24mm and that's where it was worst. Well at least my copy.

 

[warnsey]

What are you going to get as an alternative?

 

[lan]

There is no replacement functionally for me for the 18-55 IS. It's the only cheap wide angle with IS. It's only for special case slow motion effects. I won't use it from 24mm on up because I have other lenses which are better which cover that already. I already have Tamron 17-35 also.

Maybe this copy was bad and I'll try and hunt for another one.

 

[lowmagnet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WiredMonk /img/forum/go_quote.gif Or at least leave some contact info with the transit lost and found, or a notice on a few of the major stops where the owner is probable to have gotten on/off.

Just wanted to add this: their proof of ownership is the number stamped on the Canon warranty card at the factory.

 

[essasin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is no replacement functionally for me for the 18-55 IS. It's the only cheap wide angle with IS. It's only for special case slow motion effects. I won't use it from 24mm on up because I have other lenses which are better which cover that already. I already have Tamron 17-35 also. Maybe this copy was bad and I'll try and hunt for another one.

The 18-55 IS is an ok piece of glass if you know it's limitations. It still has soft corners even at f8 where it is at it's best and noticed a bit of purple fringing especially in landscape shots. To me the lens falls short overall in IQ. The IS is silent and comes in handy for an extra stop. But if you are shooting long exposures for the slow motion blur you would need a tripod anyways. But, for the price I could def relate how this could be functionally imperative.

The tammy 17-35 on the other hand is a great piece of glass. Sharp throughout the focal range, decent build quality, and a good performer overall. How do you like it?

 

[essasin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by warnsey /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the recommendations. I do mainly landscape work so a wideish 17-50 could be the go. How is the Tamron better quality than the the Sigma or the Canon? There's just to much to choose from.

What body are you shooting with? I assume you are on a 1.6x cropped body(xt, xti, 20d, 30d, 40d?) I would highly recommend Sig 10-20 (which at times gets favorable reviews over the canon) or the Canon EF-S 10-22. Both are optically excellent glass. It does suffer from some fringing and flare but that's the nature of wides .and you just have to adjust accordingly These two lenses where made for landscapes and they also make for some extremely creative shots.

The general consensus is to get the canon if you have money to blow and the sig if you are on a budget. Both are said to be optically the same.

 

[coolshot]

is it worth it to spend the extra $150 bucks to get an xti over a regualar xt? i plan on keeping the body for a long time like +3 years and maybe upgrading to whatever is next up at the time like x0D body. Right now i think new a new xt can be had under $500 and the xti is like $680 with their kit lens.

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by essasin /img/forum/go_quote.gif The tammy 17-35 on the other hand is a great piece of glass. Sharp throughout the focal range, decent build quality, and a good performer overall. How do you like it?

Yeah I like this lens. I think the Tamron 28-75 is a bit better with colors though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif is it worth it to spend the extra $150 bucks to get an xti over a regualar xt?

I'd say yes. It's autofocus is better and it has larger memory buffers and the screen is larger.

 

[martook]

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif is it worth it to spend the extra $150 bucks to get an xti over a regualar xt? i plan on keeping the body for a long time like +3 years and maybe upgrading to whatever is next up at the time like x0D body. Right now i think new a new xt can be had under $500 and the xti is like $680 with their kit lens.

Sorta depends... If you put that extra $150 on a better lens instead, you will get better pics for the money, for sure... but if you plan on keeping it (yeah right, like any gear-fi nut can keep the same stuff for 3+ years when there's something better out there!?

) and get better lenses later, you might be happier with the xti. Canons kit lens isn't very good (although not quite as bad as some seems to think) so getting a xt without lens and buying an alternative from Sigma or Tamron, second hand, would deliver higher quality pics.

 

[coolshot]

i plan on getting 50mm prime lens the cheap one for like 80 bucks and one telephoto in the $700 early 08'. I have other hobbies like head-fi where my money will be going so im not really concerned about the lastest and greatest in photography, its way down on the list.

 

[raptor84]

I've been using a 350d (rebel xt) for around 18 months+ now and its serving me well. I think the biggest improvemtn in image qulity most of the time comes when you upgrade the optics rather than the body

I unfortunately got bitten hard by the L bug.

For third party lenses be sure to test for lemons before you buy so find a shop that has an exchange policy or best if you can go down to test the samples yourself..

 

[lan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by raptor84 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've been using a 350d (rebel xt) for around 18 months+ now and its serving me well. I think the biggest improvemtn in image qulity most of the time comes when you upgrade the optics rather than the body I unfortunately got bitten hard by the L bug. For third party lenses be sure to test for lemons before you buy so find a shop that has an exchange policy or best if you can go down to test the samples yourself..

Agreed, the image quality rests mostly on the lens but the body's handling will affect how you shoot. XTi has larger memory buffer, it's AF is better, and it has faster processing. For me this is important as I have confidence in the camera.

It's still possible to get L lemons.

I've had quite a few of them and it's not cool to spend that much for something not sharp.

 

[raptor84]

Yea I've heard of L lemons before too. So far I've been lucky... and yes after the announcement of the 40D I was tempted to upgrade my body but I shall hold out and jump straight to a 1 series once I graduate and can afford it..

 

[martook]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lan /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's still possible to get L lemons. I've had quite a few of them and it's not cool to spend that much for something not sharp.

Yeah, for sure... I've got a 35L in my closet that I can't use. Reason for that is that the AF is slightly off on my body (20D), so I get tons of CA at inifinity focus if I use autofocus - if I do it manually it's a great lens. Although I could send it in and get it fixed, that might just break when I change to a new body, so I hope 5dmk2 will get the AF microadjustment thingy from the the 1dmk3, then I wont have to

I would get it fixed if I needed it, but I have a sharp Tamron 28-75 that I use a lot, and 35mm on a crop camera is no favorite anyway - got it because it'll shine on a full frame cam