Help needed on Body upgrade and/or Glass choice

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

Always invest in good glass, camera bodies come and go. Read Bryan's lens recommendation page and you'll find plenty of info there.

[Mark Elberson]

One caveat regarding the Tamron AF18-270mm/3.5-6.3 is the 6.3 max aperture which starts at only 200mm which in turn affects auto focus...among other things.


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.26.13/Tamron-AF18_2D00_270mm.jpg[/img]


Quote from dpreview.com :
<p class="H3-ruler"]"The 18-270mm VC uses a small micro-motor for autofocus, and this is the weakest point of the design. It feels rather sluggish when compared to either Nikon or Canon's 18-200mm lenses, although to be fair the motor is at least reasonably quiet (although not silent like the Nikon's AF-S motor). On the bodies used for testing (Nikon D300 and D90) AF performance was relatively slow and sometimes extremely indecisive, especially at telephoto, presumably hindered by that slow maximum aperture (most autofocus systems are only specified to work reliably with lenses that are F5.6 or brighter). "

[David Selby]

I do not recommend purchasing a 17-40 EF L if you are looking to increase the quality of your photos on your XTi.... I would look at the 24-70 2.8 or 24-105 the 17-40 just isn't that sharp or impressive really...





also the 70-200 2.8 is amazing and one of my preferred lenses.

[warrens]

Thanks so much for all the advice. I've kept it in consideration and I've made some headway although, I wouldn't say I'm quite there....


I've decided that since the lens I'll be purchasing is going to be used primarily for travel and walk-around, I'm best served buying a superzoom. Even with the IQ issues etc... (I will be buying a prime in the near-term prob between 28 - 50) but in the meantime I think an 18-200 is a good thing to have. So the debate then is:


1) Canon EF-S 18-200 IS


2) Tamron 18-270 (which some of you have already remarked has some focus issues)


3) Sigma 18-200 OS (there is also an 18-250 that just came out)


Any thoughts? I've read some interesting reviews on the sigma (not the 250, no reviews out yet) and the price point is certainly attractive!


Thanks!

[peety3]

3) Sigma 18-200 OS (there is also an 18-250 that just came out)


Any thoughts? I've read some interesting reviews on the sigma (not the 250, no reviews out yet) and the price point is certainly attractive!

Personally, I'd stay away from Sigma, period. I rent occasionally from Lens Rentals, and Sigma's quality control appears to have gotten so bad that the LensRentals technicians have created a new verb: "Sigma'd". As much as I hate the rampant misuse of apostrophes in our country, this one seems to fit. For one model lens, I think it was 4 of the 9 that LensRentals bought had to go in for repairs upon purchase, and Sigma even billed LensRentals for some of those repairs because they were "damaged by the user". They've had to rescind their usual guarantee (make a two-week or longer rental reservation that's at least two weeks in the future, and we'll buy a copy if we have to) on Sigma lenses because they had no way to be sure they could get a working copy in two weeks!

[Daniel Browning]

So the debate then is:


1) Canon EF-S 18-200 IS


2) Tamron 18-270 (which some of you have already remarked has some focus issues)


3) Sigma 18-200 OS (there is also an 18-250 that just came out)

If you're concerned about price or longer reach, the Tamron and Sigma are worth considering. I don't know how well they perform optically, but I would be very surprised if they are better than the Canon. They also tend to have poorer autofocus performance.


I suggest going with the Canon.