Canon kit lens replacement - under £200?

Totality

Totality

Totality

Soldato
Joined
5 Jul 2007
Posts
2,571
Location
NZ
Hi all,

What is a good replacement for the kit lens? I have a Tamron 17-50mm but found it to suffer from purple fringing and I didnt like a lot of the photos it produces so I'm back to the kit lens again!

I'd ideally like a 17-40mm L but then again I'd also like a 100-400mm :D My finances dont like it however hehe.

So whats a nice replacement for under £200 for the kit lens?
 
I'd say the Tamron 17-50mm, but you've discounted it.

How about:
- Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 (I use this)
- Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8
- Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5

Do you need a zoom lens?
- Canon 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4
- Canon 35mm f/2
- Sigma 30mm f/1.4
 
Last edited:
Not really after a zoom lens. Just after a lens that doesnt give photos which look like theyve been taken by a camera phone!! The kit lens does give some great shots but a lot are poor. I keep using the 200mm L as its great but its just too long. Looking for the wide->mid range so 17-50 range really :)
 
Could you have a really bad example of the Tamron 17-50mm? For the money, it gets really good reviews.

PhotoZone Review

Those resolution figures are frighteningly good. Edge performance isn't super dooper awesome, but that's because it's a cropped sensor lens. CAs aren't fantasic, but nowhere near camera phone quality!
 
im impressed with the sigma i bought :)

Sigma 20-40 2.8 DG

Heres a sample :

IMG_0109b.jpg



Andy
 
Last edited:
sloth said:
Could you have a really bad example of the Tamron 17-50mm? For the money, it gets really good reviews.

PhotoZone Review

Those resolution figures are frighteningly good. Edge performance isn't super dooper awesome, but that's because it's a cropped sensor lens. CAs aren't fantasic, but nowhere near camera phone quality!
Click to expand...

That was it :( Reviews were all good. I just found the rotating, noisy focus annoying and in low light it was extremely poor at focussing and didnt lock on most times. For a 2.8 it was shocking!
 
Tamron 17-50 or the Sigma 18-50 are the only choice IMO. Similar range to the kit lens, but better IQ. The Tamron 17-35 might be worth a look though. If you dislike the fringing from the Tamron, avoid the Sigma 17-70. It's utterly shocking for fringing, as I found when I owned one.

I now have a 17-40 which is the best short range wide zoom I've owned. I used to have a Tamron 20-40, which was probably as sharp as the 17-40, but it was loud, heavy and slow in comparison.

/edit:

Duh, i see you already have the Tamron 17-50 :p
 
danza said:
Tamron 17-50 or the Sigma 18-50 are the only choice IMO. Similar range to the kit lens, but better IQ. The Tamron 17-35 might be worth a look though. If you dislike the fringing from the Tamron, avoid the Sigma 17-70. It's utterly shocking for fringing, as I found when I owned one.

I now have a 17-40 which is the best short range wide zoom I've owned. I used to have a Tamron 20-40, which was probably as sharp as the 17-40, but it was loud, heavy and slow in comparison.

/edit:

Duh, i see you already have the Tamron 17-50 :p
Click to expand...
You are the first person of literally hundreds that has had anything bad to say about the Sigma 17-70, and i've read a lot of reviews from websites and real people and every single person has had nothing but praise about it, you must have had a bad copy as you know what sigmas QC is like.

At op, before discounting the 17-70, go try it out before you buy it, and buy from a shop so you can be sure to get a decent one, they may even pricematch as some do.
 
danza said:
If you dislike the fringing from the Tamron, avoid the Sigma 17-70. It's utterly shocking for fringing, as I found when I owned one.
Click to expand...


Eek. I've got one and haven't seen this problem with mine, despite using it in some pretty harsh situations. Mine is sharp, quick and gives decent colours. Could yours have been a duff copy perhaps?

The range suits the 1.6x crop just about right for my needs. I tend to shoot less wide, more tele so the 17mm is not really a limitation as yet. (This opinion may change once I try a mate's 10-20, though....) I don't see me swapping it for a while, unless a tasty 17-70 f/2.8L suddenly appears......:D
 
I've also been looking at the 17-70. I've also read that apparently it's better IQ than the 18-50 2.8.

Very tempted, to upgrade my kit lens with it. hmm...

Chris.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom