[peddr]

I am looking for a relatively lightweight walkaround all purpose lens for my 400d ( XTI ).

This is one I am considering, but I want some opinions. I have read the reviews, but want some practical in the field, by actual photographers opinions.

If you own or have used this lens please let me know what you think.

BTW, I tried the Canon 17-85 and did not like it...too soft, too much distortion on the wide end.

Thanks

Guillermo

[Sparkymark]

Welcome to Pixalo, Guillermo

I had one for a while last summer and autumn, and liked it a lot (on a 350D). It's good and sharp, nice bokeh, although not f/2.8 for much of the focal range, but a great walkaround lens . I only sold it as I'd upgraded to a 5D/24-105 f/4 L .

Sample shots:

[ds00kg]

Personally I really like this lens, sure its not a L series but for the money it's great!

[peddr]

[quote=Sparkymark;219142]Welcome to Pixalo, Guillermo

I had one for a while last summer and autumn, and liked it a lot (on a 350D). It's good and sharp, nice bokeh, although not f/2.8 for much of the focal range, but a great walkaround lens . I only sold it as I'd upgraded to a 5D/24-105 f/4 L .


Interestingly enough I have a 24-105 and a 30D, but I found myself not wanting to take all that size and weight and opted for the G9. The G9 always wound up frustrating and disappointing me. That is why I " downgraded to and XTi/400d and why I am looking for a lighter alternative to the 24-105. BTW I am one on the few people not blown away by that lens. The AF is fast and silent but the IQ is not out of this earth. I even sent it back to Canon for calibration.

[Sparkymark]

I tend to agree, actually - I like the 24-105, but it doesn't 'wow' me as much as I'd hoped. I actually get sharper images from my Tamron 28-75mm, which is f/2.8 throughout.

[samleo]

Hi, bought one for my new Sony A 350 instead of the Sony kit lens; its an excellent lens and I fully recommend it. I,m a big Sigma fan and quite frankly, I would,nt buy anything else!

[peddr]

Originally Posted by Sparkymark

I tend to agree, actually - I like the 24-105, but it doesn't 'wow' me as much as I'd hoped. I actually get sharper images from my Tamron 28-75mm, which is f/2.8 throughout.

Exactly. I have the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and find it to be very sharp compared to the " L " 24-105

[emmettleffel]

I have the Sigma 17 - 70-mm and use it from Landscapes to Portraits and am very pleased with it. However to be fair, I do put all my RAW files through DxO pro 5 and this corrects any inbuilt distortions.

[stepheno]

Interesting views on the 24-105. I use it on a 40D and 5D and I can't fault it.

[clafra]

Originally Posted by emmettleffel

I have the Sigma 17 - 70-mm and use it from Landscapes to Portraits and am very pleased with it. However to be fair, I do put all my RAW files through DxO pro 5 and this corrects any inbuilt distortions.

Oh this is a good point, I also see quiet some distortion in some of my images.

What means DxO?

[Steve]

DXO is a RAW software processing package...

DxO Labs - Home