Recommandation for lens pls

[kksuen]

Hi all,

I am using Canon 550D.
I am looking for a zoom lens with f2.8 stop with IS.

currently I only found Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 with VC

is there any other available 3rd party lens has something suits me?


I would would like to ask about Lower Pro backpack. is the quality good? altho i am looking at Think Tank and KATA too

 

[Airekris]

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Zoom Lens since you using Crop sensor.
As for bags, its simply up to your own preference.

 

[kksuen]

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Zoom Lens since you using Crop sensor.
As for bags, its simply up to your own preference.

thanks.. i'm afraid that i might be changing my body in years to come since i have been using my 550D for 2 yrs +

thanks for your advice

 

[233mmx]

moved to DSLR subfolder

 

[Ev0d3vil]

Get a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I just got it for 300, not too expensive for a f2.8 lens of this size..

 

[Streetwise]

Sigma having a year end promo.....17-50mm for $530 at MSColour.

 

[Yongie]

Tamron get non VC 1 ~ cheaper and sharper~

 

[rarenick]

I'm using tamron 17-50 without vc. Cheap, relatively small, lightweight, sharp.

Focusing seems slightly slow but negligible. U don't really need vc for most situations since this is a short lens.

 

[Streetwise]

I'm using tamron 17-50 without vc. Cheap, relatively small, lightweight, sharp.

Focusing seems slightly slow but negligible. U don't really need vc for most situations since this is a short lens.

VC useful for poor lighting conditions leh.....

 

[rarenick]

If u shoot people, still need 1/50 sec

 

[Streetwise]

If u shoot people, still need 1/50 sec

Hving VC is not a cure all but it does allow a shot to be taken at 1/20 without a tripod right?

 

[kksuen]

Hving VC is not a cure all but it does allow a shot to be taken at 1/20 without a tripod right?

i also think have VC is important. esp when shooting exciting moment no time to wait.

i think tamron 24-70 has fast focusing...

im struggling with canon 17-55 or tamron 24-70.. the diff is at least 400bucks? maybe or around there.. according to bhphoto website..

 

[davidktw]

i also think have VC is important. esp when shooting exciting moment no time to wait.

i think tamron 24-70 has fast focusing...

im struggling with canon 17-55 or tamron 24-70.. the diff is at least 400bucks? maybe or around there.. according to bhphoto website..

Tamron VC, or Canon IS, or Nikon VR wouldn't solve the fundamental problem of the minimum shutter speed requirement for a moving subject. If your subject is not moving, image stabilisation technique will allow you to capture the stationary subject at the same low speed shutter speed and still able to produce relatively sharp image without tripod. If your subject is moving, no amount of image stabilisation is going to save the day. For moving human subjects of roughly <10m away, you probably need something around 1/125 to freeze them. For a running subject, you will need at least 1/350 to get sharp images of them. The minimum shutter speed also changes depending on whether they are moving towards you or perpendicular to you, and the speed at which they move.

My Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 don't even have any VR and it still gives spectacularly sharp image once the shutter speed is at the right settings.

 

[rarenick]

Tamron 28-75 is equally slow n not wide enough at 28.

If u want value for money with good size, weight, image quality etc, tamron non-vc is good enough for a short zoom lens

 

[iCuteCube]

550d is a DX, must as well get a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 WITH VC or without is fine, without VC is sharper, but you need higher shuttle speed to capture your target.

If you want something slightly better in performance, can look for Sigma 17-50 f2.8 , but some people say the price does not justify the slight image quality improvement for Tamron.

Personally i went for Sigma, and used it for 1 year now, no regrets, it is about a couple hundred of dollars more expensive. But my break even point is 2 years, still using it now.

 

[Yongie]

VC is nt really required on this kind of standard zoom lens. Unless you told me ur hand shakes all the time. If not, the sharpness on the non VC version will definetly worth every penny you spend.

As for dark area, utilize your F2.8 if you dont have a tripod. Depending on where and what you are shooting, you can have your ISO setting up to 800 or just keep it at 400 to minimise the noise.

Sigma is also a nice 1, just the price a bit higher than Tamron, unless you have the budget, or else just invest on other accessories that will enchant your images (filters, square filters etc)~

 

[ninabey]

Get a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I just got it for 300, not too expensive for a f2.8 lens of this size..

where did u get it?? is it suitable for food photography? how's the bokeh effect like?

 

[rarenick]

Buy from Clubsnap. For food should be ok. But it depends how close u want to capture. Some lenses got limitation on how close and how big it can go. Bokeh just like any f2.8 lens. U want a lot bokeh then buy f1.8 or f1.4 lenses

 

[ninabey]

Buy from Clubsnap. For food should be ok. But it depends how close u want to capture. Some lenses got limitation on how close and how big it can go. Bokeh just like any f2.8 lens. U want a lot bokeh then buy f1.8 or f1.4 lenses

ya.. but not cheap man. hahahaha... anyway what's the difference between a third party lens and directly from manufacturer?

 

[Streetwise]

550d is a DX, must as well get a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 WITH VC or without is fine, without VC is sharper, but you need higher shuttle speed to capture your target.

If you want something slightly better in performance, can look for Sigma 17-50 f2.8 , but some people say the price does not justify the slight image quality improvement for Tamron.

Personally i went for Sigma, and used it for 1 year now, no regrets, it is about a couple hundred of dollars more expensive. But my break even point is 2 years, still using it now.

With Sigma current year end promo, price diff bet Tamron and Sigma is no longer tat significant.....unless look at 2nd hand.....