[tontoshorse]

There are a totally bewildering array of lenses to fill the 20 ish to 70 ish gap.
Now that I've sold the 18-55 Nokon kit lens I'm looking to fill that sort of gap.
I'd prefer a fast lens and not to bothered about Nikon/sigma/etc/etc.

So......
Anyone got a lens they are truly happy with and like to share their knowledge?
Or even anyone lusting after a particular lens and their reasons?

Cheers

[SignalMan]

I'm using the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, bought from a helpful guy on here 'Paul' and I can't complain about the results but 'niggling' at the back of my mind is the thought of the equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 but I can't afford the £779.99 nice piece of glass tho and I know it would make me a better tog, it would 'wouldn't it'?

YES it would, I know it would! anyway, what do you know

[tontoshorse]

Originally Posted by SignalMan

I'm using the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, bought from a helpful guy on here 'Paul' and I can't complain about the results but 'niggling' at the back of my mind is the thought of the equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 but I can't afford the £779.99 nice piece of glass tho and I know it would make me a better tog, it would 'wouldn't it'?

YES it would, I know it would! anyway, what do you know

Yes it definitely would, of course it would. Now go and buy it, .....today.

[Steve N]

Originally Posted by SignalMan

...at the back of my mind is the thought of the equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 but I can't afford

I've got one of these and it's hardly been off my camera since I got it. I love it.

Buy one and worry about the cost later

[richard plumb]

isn't there a sigma 17-70 2.8?

[grantsteve]

I went for the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8, and at around £220 from OSD represents, IMO, cracking value for money.

Great lens, consistently good results, decent build quality, nicely weighted .... what are you waiting for?!

[tontoshorse]

Originally Posted by richard plumb

isn't there a sigma 17-70 2.8?

There's a 17-70 2.8-4.5, Richard. "Only" £189. Would be ideal if it were constant.