Kit lens outgrown

[johndow]

I recently had the opportunity to take a few family photos at a birthday party to try out my relatively new camera and lens. Because the party was indoors in a function room, i tried to use my 50mm 1.8 prime as much as possible. However, even at the other side of the room (small room) i could only really get a few people in the shot.

I did get a full family shot of everyone on sofas in the lobby, but i had to use the kit 18-55mm at its widest to get everyone in. The lighting wasn't bad, so i used on-board flash for fill and set aperture to 5.6 and ISO to 100. I possibly should have set the aperture to f8 in hindsight.

The photos with the 50mm prime at f4 were sharp and very useable. However, the group shot with the kit lens at 18mm was very soft, especially for those standing at the edges of the group. I shot with RAW and converted using DPP. I sharpened where i could, but even at +4 with a relatively sharp centre, the people on the fringes where blurred and pasty looking.

I have blown the photo up for a relative to 12x8in. They think it's fine, but looking closely it doesn't have great detail and is very frustrating.

I know everyone says use the kit lens for a while before looking at upgrading, but i now think that time has come. Problem is, what to go for.

Budget is £250max. Likely to be taking more family/ landscape/ portrait type photos and less telephoto stuff.

Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - reviews give excellent optical performance throughout the range, but i feel this would leave my 50mm prime obsolete.

Sigma 17-70mm additional 20mm range is very attractive as i don't intend buying a telephoto lens. However, i don't know what the IQ would be like for the wider angle family shots.

Or, do i forget the wide angle and go for a 24- something with decent IQ


Thanks
JD

[jonnypb]

Originally Posted by johndow

Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - reviews give excellent optical performance throughout the range, but i feel this would leave my 50mm prime obsolete.

Sigma 17-70mm additional 20mm range is very attractive as i don't intend buying a telephoto lens. However, i don't know what the IQ would be like for the wider angle family shots.

I have the Tamron and use to have the Sigma you're talking about. Apart from the Sigma having the extra 20mm which is useful the Tamron beats the Sigma in every other area, IQ, focusing, constant 2.8, build

Yes it probably would mean that you won't use the 50mm as much as you do with your kit lens

[Steve Zissou]

I upgraded my kit lens as I found it was too soft and went for the Sigma 17-70mm. It's a cracking lens and I don't regret it in the least! I've heard that some people have had soft versions of the lens, but I think they must be few and far between - mine's pretty damn sharp!

[loz]

What about a wider prime?

a Canon 24mm F2.8
or a Sigma 30mm F1.4

[rizingstar]

I've recently taken a family of 16 with the 50mm 1.8 and it came out great all in, yes you have to stand way back but in my experience is does well, the 12 x 8 print from Photobox is superb aswell

[dfrear]

Ive got the sigma 17-70 and cant really fault it in the IQ department. Great lens and well worth it for the money.

[Biscuit761]

Another vote for the Sigma 17 - 70, but there are times when I wish I had gone for a constant 2.8 lens.

Bill

[allymac123]

If you can stretch to the Tamron 17-50 get it. It's a much better lens for the constant F2.8 (which trust me if you're anything like me is absolutely essential), sharper, better AF. I would extremely strongly suggest the Tamron over the Sigma.

[senu]

Originally Posted by allymac123

If you can stretch to the Tamron 17-50 get it. It's a much better lens for the constant F2.8 (which trust me if you're anything like me is absolutely essential), sharper, better AF. I would extremely strongly suggest the Tamron over the Sigma.

Ditto
And when you get a bonus, et a UWA, they retain sharpness and a lack of distortion between 17- 24!
I have a Tokina but others swear by the Sigma or Canon

[onefunkypenguin]

a nikon user here but found the same problems with the kit lens.

the tamron 17-50 was the lens i went for, abs amazing and at 200 from onestop, a bargain too! its been on my camera since i got it though and your right bout the 50mm, not touched it since, maybe sell it to recoup the costs???

[stylgeo]

I second the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

This shot was an unfair comparison between the Sigma and the Canon kit lens. Both shot at 30mm, same aperture at f/4. As you can see, they are both taken from the center of the image, straight from the camera
Quess which is which.


Another option, if you don't want your prime to become obsolete (sorry if it's already mentioned, haven't read all the posts above) is the Sigma 10-20mm. So, now you'll have a wide angle and a longer prime. But I would strongly suggest you got an external flash aswell, bounce flash is always more flattering than straight in-your-face flash.

[johndow]

All
Thanks for the advice.

Seems that the Tamron has popular opinion over the Sigma even though it lacks the extra 20mm or so.

I would only usually use the 50mm prime at 2.8 or above to ensure i get a sharp picture, so how would that fair against the Tamron at 2.8?? would the same principle apply with the Tamron that you would have to stop down from 2.8 to say 3.5/4 to get an equally sharp picture or does it perform well wide open?

If what everyone is saying is true, i will likely get rid of the Prime lens and buy the Tamron as a replacement for both the prime and the kit lens.

I had thought of the 17-70 range as being an ideal walkabout, but i don't think the extra 20mm would make up for a lower IQ and the need for over sharpening. I know there are always going to be trade-offs, but for the time saved in swapping to the prime when i want to take a portrait, and the PP time in sharpening, i think the Tamron is the wise choice.

Thanks Again

JD

[Holowlegs]

Hello there


I had the same decision around Christmas time and went for the Tamron. Have also decided to keep my 50mm as well as I still use this.

As for sharpness its most probably sharper at f4 than f2.8, but this happens with most lens, overall a great buy.


Cheers Holo

[xcitant]

In most cases, a prime will be sharper than a zoom, same focal length, same f-stop. Besides you can shoot at F2 with the zoom...