Printable View
I have a sigma 17-70 2.8/4.5 on my Eos 30D , good range and with F2.8 at 17mm is handy in low light, i was going to buy a canon 17-85 but all reviews i read said it was average and the packaged 18-55 isnt worth the plastic its made from. The IS 18-55 has good reviews but the siggy won it for me and didnt break the bank.
If you buy L series glass you will never go back to anything else. I ended up buying a couple of L series lenses, on one occassion my wife needed to use one of them so I went back to the packaged lense than came with the second camera body, it was not a pinch on the L.
As someone who owns a Nikon FM, Nikon F100 (both now worthless), and a Nikon D80, why do you say that? I thought the Nikon/Canon stuff was like the Mazda/Honda debate?Quote:
Originally Posted by dm_td5
Canon have some nice cameras at the moment with much higher resolution than the Nikons.
This question is not intended as a stir - just asking :)
Firstly resolution isn't everything. More pixels is not the entire solution with present sensor technology. Secondly - and this is personal - I hate Canon ergonomics on their DSLR's. The Nikon's just feel right in my hands, the Canon's do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Rightfoot
Also Canon are like Toyota in marketing and market presence so everyone thinks they are great and they created the DSLR revolution. When in fact it was Nikon released the first commercial DSLR - D1. Canon's EOS300D was the first low end consumer unit.
Another point is it's always fun to stir up Canon owners, their usually as sensitive about their cameras as Land Cruiser owners about their 4WD:twisted:
Finally though I must admit Canon makes some good gear. The EOS 450D/500D is on par with the Nikon D60. Both makes have very ordinary kit lenses, although from what I've seen I think the Nikon may be slightly better quality. Pro-series lenses though are excellent and each manufacturer has a few models that the other doesn't unfortunately.
At the end of the day it comes down to what's affordable and what you are comfortable using. Once you start buying expensive glass you are usually staying with that brand.
:D:Dnikon is like a landcruiser, everyone thinks they are the best but we know better
L glass is nice but for a low spec body is unconomical and not many can justify the expense.
Just to add to this, I've been on both sides. Mainly lower end Nikon in the days of film but the 300D made me cross over, and immediately got two of the cheap lenses.Quote:
Originally Posted by dm_td5
But the moment the D70 came out, I sold all my Canon stuff and switched back.
The Nikon body and kit lens (18-70) felt like real cameras/lenses, unlike the dinky Canon.
Since then, I have moved up the Nikon food chain to a D700, and I agree that both sides have excellent mid to high end bodies and pro lenses, but I still believe that Canon kit stuff are kid stuff.
I still use and prefer Canon P&S.
Here's an example of what I mean: To my untrained eye these three are basically equivalent but the prices vary greatly.
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f3:5-5:6 IS = $639
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 IS Lens Lenses
Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS = $485
Sigma 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 DC OS Lenses
Tamron AF 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) = $395
Tamron AF 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Lenses
As an aside, I found that on this site buying a 450D and the lens separately is $150 cheaper than the identical kit!
I think the biggest difference they hack user will find is by changing to a quality lens, not to a more expensive body.
My opinion is to go to L glass (with the red ring) and go cheaper on the body. The other non L glass that is excellent is the EF-S 10-22 but this cant be used on full frame.
This is what I did:
EOS-350D
EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 (recommended by one of the journos from Overlander)
24-70 f2.8L
70-200 f2.8L
Very happy.
The three lenses you mention are very similar, only significant differences are the Tamron isn't optically stabilised and the Canon is slightly faster at the maximum zoom. Quality wise I suspect the Canon is the better made.
I have the Nikon 18-200 and it is a good general purpose lens and if you want one lens on the camera and don't want to be swapping it, aren't worried about the speed of focus or looking for the sharpest image then any of the 18-200+ lenses will do the trick. If you want a bit more though you need to look at the internal focus Sigma or Canon L-series zooms or a prime lens.
Have a look here it may help: Lens Reviews: Digital Photography Review