New Sigma 18-50 Macro - any good at long-distance?
Discussion
OK, I admit, I'm dithering!
I want a new wide-ish angle walkabout lens to replace / supplement the Canon 28-135IS (f/3.5-6.3). I'd pretty much decided on the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, but on my last thread Duncan commented on the lack of build quality, so I'm re-assessing.
The new Sigma gets some very good reviews, albeit every review talks in great depth about it's macro ability without commenting on how sharp it is at long-distance. Which really doesn't bloody help when at least half of what I'll use it for is landscapes!!!
Shortlist is:-
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
(new) Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5
...unless anyone else can think of an equivalent without spending over c.£300.
Cheers,
M.
I want a new wide-ish angle walkabout lens to replace / supplement the Canon 28-135IS (f/3.5-6.3). I'd pretty much decided on the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, but on my last thread Duncan commented on the lack of build quality, so I'm re-assessing.
The new Sigma gets some very good reviews, albeit every review talks in great depth about it's macro ability without commenting on how sharp it is at long-distance. Which really doesn't bloody help when at least half of what I'll use it for is landscapes!!!
Shortlist is:-
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
(new) Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4.5
...unless anyone else can think of an equivalent without spending over c.£300.
Cheers,
M.
I have one of these if you consider it is on a Nikon. It has replaced the 18-70 kit lens, seem to get less barrelling at 18 than I did before, and the F2.8 is nice at 50 compared to the F5 that I could get with the kit lens. Worked out at only a few hundred dollars after I traded in the kit lens.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff