Camera Labs

I just bought a 50D body in replacement for my aging Rebel 300D. I am using a Sigma 18-125, 3.5-5.6 none IS lens that was on the Rebel for the past 4 years. After more than a thousand shots, I realize this lens cannot exploit the full potential of the 50D as my photos are far from being as sharp as those published on this forum.

After reading many post I had made up my mind on the Canon 17-55, 2.8 IS even if it is not quite long enough. But, when I saw the size and weight of this lens, I realized that it is not suitable for my needs. I do a lot of landscape and nature photography, walking for miles and often in difficult situations and this lens is definitely too heavy. Switching lens is also out of the question.

I saw one that would probably be more adequate, the Sigma 17-70, 2.8-4.5 macro. It is a tad bigger than the 18-125. At 17mm it is wide enough and at 70mm well, considering the cropping factor of the 15 mp 50D, it would probably be just as long as the 18-125 on my old camera. I understand that it is not stabilized but, I don’t think one is made in that zoom range.

So, my question is, would the image quality of the Sigma 17-70 be that much better than the 18-125?

The Canon 17-55 is an expensive lens. If you can live without the really wide-angle and fast aperture, I can strongly recommend the Canon EF 24-105mm L IS USM. It is about 50$ more expensive than the 17-55mm. I almost never find it to narrow and it would definitely exploit the potential of your lens. (Note that this lens is also quite big and heavy). Just a recommendation from my side

I do not have any experience with the Sigma, so I will let other more qualified members answer you concerning that.

_________________
Canon 40D | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM | Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II | Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM | Canon BG-E2N | Canon Speedlite 580EXII |

Hi ADP,

I've locked your earlier duplicate of this thread. That way a forum member won't waste time offering an answer that's already been given here.

Bob.

_________________
OM-D E-M5 + ED 12-50mm, H-PS14042E, H-F007014E, L-RS014150E, M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm 1:1.8.
Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.

To answer your question directly: It is better if you use big aperture such as f/5.6 to f8 on the wide angle end, but overall it is not so much better.

_________________
RadiantLite - Cameras and Lenses Comparison Reviews, buying guide, photo taking techniques and other tips
My Portfolio - Some photos from my work

The Sigma one is definately better than any kit lens, thats why I sold my 18-55 Is lens and got the Sigma.

It got a nice macro mode, and the 2.8 F stop definately helps.

But unfortunately it got a few downsides as well,
It suffers from lens creep, the focus ring moves as the camera focuses and its quite load doing so.
The lens does of course not have OS (similiar to canons IS) either.

But if u want to see actual pictures of the lens, just check out my flickr, most pictures were taken with that lens.

_________________
5D Mark II
Canon 50mm 1.2 L
Canon 24-70 2.8 L
Canon Speedlight 430 EXII
Manfrotto 055 XPROB BLACK
Crumpler 750

My Flickr