Thoughts on 3rd party lens

**rtapales** · 10-23-2010, 06:34 AM

I am about a year into this addiction called Photography! I started with my first DSLR as a T1i last October and now have a 60D scehduled to arrive Monday. (Let me be the first to say that one of the key driving factors for the 60D over the 7D was in-fact the articulating screen because I shoot video ringside for MMA events - but more importantly the 400 price difference sealed it for me.)

I can quickly see that this will be an expensive hobby but since I am a newbie (he says with pride) I am very price concious and am not comfortable with dropping $$ north of 700.00 or even 1000.00 for the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (which is probably going to be my lens of choice)

I am looking for something within that focal range (17-55) that can be my leave it on the body lens for most everything. I shoot mostly my kids - outdoor portraits but recently was asked to be the photographer for our chuch so there will be a lot of indoor shooting. I am looking at the Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF Lens which is roughly 400 and change after the current rebate.

Anyone have any experience with them? How about Sigmas? any other suggestions?

I am also an amateur MMA / Boxing photographer - basically I get to tag along with my brother in law who is a professional MMA photographer and his 5D MII

**neuroanatomist** · 10-23-2010, 12:07 PM

Hi Rob, and welcome to the TDP Forums!

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is certainly a great lens - but an expensive one. Although I have not personally used one, the Tamron 17-50mm lens that you mention is reportedly a very good 3rd party alternative. It does not have image stabilization (Tamron calls it vibration compensation, VC), but even though IS/VC does offer advantages for low-light shooting at those short focal lengths, it's much more useful for longer lenses (and IS does not help stop subject motion, only camera shake). There is a VC version of the Tamron 17-50mm, but reportedly that's not as good optically as the non-VC lens. One frequent contributor here, Jan (Sheiky) used the Tamron 17-50mm non-VC in the past and liked it.

For a decent indoor lens (this applies to indoor sports as well as your church shooting, depending on the venues), you need to be looking for a fast aperture. Sometimes f/2.8 is fast enough, but often not. Since zoom lenses only get as fast as f/2.8, that means looking at a prime. Fortunately, there are several good options that won't break the bank. The first thing to determine is what focal length you need - you mention a superzoom with a range up to 200mm, but that is often too long for indoor shots (and those lenses are way too slow anyway).

I'd recommend something like the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - excellent image quality, very fast focusing, and IMO one of the best values in the Canon lineup. It's probably a reasonable focal length for ringside shots, and also works wonderfully for outdoor portraits (you might need a 2- or 3-stop ND filter to get a really wife aperture in full daylight, tough, but 58mm filters are reasonably inexpensive). There's also the 100mm f/2 (close cousin to the 85mm f/1.8), and the 135mm f/2L (which is much more expensive). I think the key thing to determine is the focal length you need for ringside shots. Ask your brother what focal length(s) he uses for the kind of shooting you want to do. But, remember to divide the focal length he likes on his 5DII's by 1.6 - since your T1i and 60D use an APS-C sensor, there's a crop factor effect, such that if he uses a 135mm lens, you'd want an 85mm lens to achieve the same framing, etc. The other thing to keep in mind with focal length is that the 60D has a lot of pixels to work with - if your lens is a little short, you can crop a bit if needed, but if your lens is too long, sometimes you cannot back up.

Hope that helps...

--John

**lilkngster** · 10-23-2010, 01:49 PM

Hi Rob,

I am also new to this hobby with a T2i since April. I think the 17-55 is the way to go. It has its pros and cons, but just going by the number of keepers, that and the 70-200 IS f/4 which I rented for a week, were by far the best of the zooms I have tried (less than the $1200 range). If you are looking for just one lens, you can

**andnowimbroke** · 10-23-2010, 02:14 PM

Borrow one of your B-I-L's lenses and take some pics or use the one lens you have and do some test shots. Go back and see what focal length your shots are. That will tell you more than anything what you need. If your always at one end or the other, It will give you an idea what you don't need as far as focal length is concerned. Did you keep your first camera? You could put a prime on the old one and a zoom on the new one and crank up the ISO to get a faster shutter speed. Primes are better in low light, but theseMMA boys travel all over the ring pretty quickly and might opt for a zoom too. I'd even skip the image stablization bacause you'll prolly be shooting at a fast shutter speed anyway. Borrow one of your B-I-L's lenses and take some pics or use the one lens you have. Then go back and see what focal length your shots are. That will tell you more than anything what you need. Then figure out which of the brands you can handle. Does the 60D shoot video too? I've forgotten already.

**rtapales** · 10-23-2010, 03:29 PM

Wow... thanks John for the detailed reply.. that is exactly the kind of feed back I was looking for!

**rtapales** · 10-23-2010, 03:30 PM

@ patrick thanks for the tip on the book.. that is my biggest challenge being so new to photography is learning. I will check it out.

**rtapales** · 10-23-2010, 03:33 PM

@ andnoimbroke (love the name btw - so TRUE with this hoobby!) I am heading to the Pacquiao vs Margarito fight in Arlington with him on the 13th and I def. plan on borrowing a few casue it

**Daniel Browning** · 10-23-2010, 08:51 PM