Want to upgrade, help me choose!

djd80

Hi All

I have a 450D for about a year and a half and have been using the 18-55 kit lens for most of my shots up to now and am wanting to upgrade it.

I have the 18-55, a nifty fifty(thanks Santa), and Sigma 70-300.

I shoot mostly landscape shots (flickr HERE) and had decided I was going to go with a very wide angle Sigma 10-20 but now it has come to making a decision I am dawdling and unsure what to do. Whether to go with the very wide angle sigma or with one of the others below that would have more uses than the Sigma and just stitch my wide landscapes if I want to take them.I dont have the cash for the Canon lenses unfortunately.

I got some rough prices too and all seem to have good reviews according to testfreaks.com

Can anyone help me make a decision!!

Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 ~420
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro HSM ~395
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG MACRO ~450
Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Aspherical(IF) ~550

Thanks and Sorry for the long post!!

Borderfox

One thing I will say is that you dont need ultra wide to get good landscapes. First port of call should be a sturdy tripod

CabanSail

I have the Sigma 10-20 & find it a very useful lens, in fact it's probably the lens that is most on my camera these days. It will work fine for Landscapes but is also useful in a lot of other situations.

Crispin

Borderfox wrote: »

One thing I will say is that you dont need ultra wide to get good landscapes. First port of call should be a sturdy tripod

Or a bean bag (recessionary times)

back on topic, I totally recommend the sigma 10-20. bear in mind there is a newer version of that lens to the one you listed too

djd80

Thanks for the replies guys..

Borderfox wrote: »

One thing I will say is that you dont need ultra wide to get good landscapes. First port of call should be a sturdy tripod

I have a tripod already so sorted on that front. I know you dont particularly nead an ultra wide but there have def been a few times recently where I kinda thought a wider lens would be great.

CabanSail wrote: »

I have the Sigma 10-20 & find it a very useful lens, in fact it's probably the lens that is most on my camera these days. It will work fine for Landscapes but is also useful in a lot of other situations.

Good to hear that, thanks

Crispin wrote: »

Or a bean bag (recessionary times)

back on topic, I totally recommend the sigma 10-20. bear in mind there is a newer version of that lens to the one you listed too

Yeah I saw the newer version but I dont really think it justifies the extra cash. If I get the 10-20 it'll be mostly landscapes and will usually be used at f10+

magicbastarder

i remember someone mentioning here that there's a utility which will parse all your shots and give you a graph of the focal lengths used - will tell you if you're taking a lot of shots at the widest of your current lenses. if not, the cost of going wider may be wasted...

djd80

Well I found that program you were talking about, it's called ExposurePlot and can be downloaded for free HERE

It showed me that I took about 23% of my shots between the 18-24mm range so thats not the overwhelming majority by any means. Going on that I think I can live without the ultra wide 10-20 and am now thinking of going with the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC Macro HSM which seems to have good reviews on Testfreaks I'd like the 24-70 but I think I would miss the 18-24 range alright.

Anyone have the lens by any chance?

pixbyjohn

Have you considered the Canon 17-55 lens f2.8, it is made for cropped sensors

djd80

pixbyjohn wrote: »

Have you considered the Canon 17-55 lens f2.8, it is made for cropped sensors

Well I looked at it but then I looked at the price and that was the end of that...

.Longshanks.

dar_d wrote: »

Well I looked at it but then I looked at the price and that was the end of that...

I picked up a sigma 18-50mm f2.8 for €150 recently via adverts.ie.....Might not be of the same quality as the Canon 17-55, but it suits my needs

jtang

Crispin wrote: »

Or a bean bag (recessionary times)

back on topic, I totally recommend the sigma 10-20. bear in mind there is a newer version of that lens to the one you listed too

i too would recommend the sigma 10-20mm (i got the old version of it recently), and its a fun lens to have, i only have the kit lens and a the nifty fifty for my 1000d (having moved up from a ae-1 none of my primes work), i find zoom lenses less fun to have compared with wideangle/primes. can you rent one to try out?

Roy Rogers

Weird, I came in here to post pretty much the exact same question as this...

I've the same kit, except a 1000D instead of a 450D.

OP, did you get a new lens yet? Can I ask how you're finding it?

djd80

Hey...I went with the 18-50 2.8 in the end and am very happy with it so far so wouldnt hesitate to reccommend it..

Heebie

I too, have the Sigma 10-20mm, although mine's on a Pentax.. the glass is the same. I find it very useful, and nice & sharp. It's all around just a very nice lens.

CabanSail wrote: »

I have the Sigma 10-20 & find it a very useful lens, in fact it's probably the lens that is most on my camera these days. It will work fine for Landscapes but is also useful in a lot of other situations.

Heebie

My favorite lens out of mine is a 70-200mm f2.8 from Sigma. It's enormous.. but it's SO sharp! It beats my 70-300mm f4.5-6 Tamron by miles..and that's not a bad lens.

dar_d wrote: »

Hey...I went with the 18-50 2.8 in the end and am very happy with it so far so wouldnt hesitate to reccommend it..