Associate
I recently pick up a bundle on the bay of a canon 400D, Canon 17-85 IS, 60mm macro and 15mm fisheye. I went for the bundle partly cause it was a good offer and now, having had a good play with it all im thinking about what parts I would like to keep and which to change.
I was really looking forward to the fisheye but as soon as i tried it out my reaction was, oh thats not very fishy at all. Having done some deeper research it turns out after the 1.6 crop its not, in fact the corners just look a little wonky. Also after the crop the field of view goes down from 180* to more like 105*, which really takes the fun out of it. So even tho its worth a bit it doesnt do much for me.
The marco is lovely, its sharp, really nice colour, focuses really close (obviously
) and f2.8 just makes your photos look pro.
I seem to be getting mixed results with the 17-85, its nice that its got a good bit of range and IS but it seems to get average to poor reviews all over.
So, I definitely want to get rid of the fisheye as i just don't think i will get the use out of it. And i think i might as well replace the 17-85 with a better general use / walkabout lens.
Having done lots of reading the Tamron 18-50, Sigma 17-50 and 18-70, consistently get rated highly as general use lenses. The other lens that I am really impressed with is the Canon 50mm 1.8, however having spend a while with the 17-85 set to 50mm it seems generally to close for a 1.6 crop body, so was wondering how people felt the sigma 30mm f1.4 would fit in? It also gets good reviews.
So if I ended up with the macro, a Tamron 18-50 and a sigma 30mm would I be getting way to much over lap? does the Tamron make the 30mm or macro not needed? I guess the bad thing is it would mean i had 3 lenses and my range would stop at 50mm. Any ideas or recommendations would to great.
I was really looking forward to the fisheye but as soon as i tried it out my reaction was, oh thats not very fishy at all. Having done some deeper research it turns out after the 1.6 crop its not, in fact the corners just look a little wonky. Also after the crop the field of view goes down from 180* to more like 105*, which really takes the fun out of it. So even tho its worth a bit it doesnt do much for me.
The marco is lovely, its sharp, really nice colour, focuses really close (obviously
) and f2.8 just makes your photos look pro.I seem to be getting mixed results with the 17-85, its nice that its got a good bit of range and IS but it seems to get average to poor reviews all over.
[DOD]Asprilla;11488067 said:
So, I definitely want to get rid of the fisheye as i just don't think i will get the use out of it. And i think i might as well replace the 17-85 with a better general use / walkabout lens.
Having done lots of reading the Tamron 18-50, Sigma 17-50 and 18-70, consistently get rated highly as general use lenses. The other lens that I am really impressed with is the Canon 50mm 1.8, however having spend a while with the 17-85 set to 50mm it seems generally to close for a 1.6 crop body, so was wondering how people felt the sigma 30mm f1.4 would fit in? It also gets good reviews.
So if I ended up with the macro, a Tamron 18-50 and a sigma 30mm would I be getting way to much over lap? does the Tamron make the 30mm or macro not needed? I guess the bad thing is it would mean i had 3 lenses and my range would stop at 50mm. Any ideas or recommendations would to great.