Zoom Lens Thoughts?

[Photo-John]

I'm looking for opinions from people who own the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di, or the Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS lenses. I want to get a new all-purpose lens to use with the Rebel XTi. I am interested in IS for shooting tradeshows and I'm interested in a 2.8 aperture for selective focus. To some extent, it's possible to trade a 2.8 aperture for image stabilization. But the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS has it all. The problems with that lens are the weight and the price. I'm leaning toward the Tamron because I have the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 XR Di and it's a wonderful lens - inexpensive, great optics, small, and light. Since whatever I buy will be taken on the bike for mountain bike photos, small and light are big bonuses.

Anyone with any experience with these lense, or with other lens suggestion, please let me know what you think. And if you do own any of these lenses and haven't posted reviews, please do. They all have some reviews but could definitely use more. Here's a link to the zoom lens review page:

Read and write 35mm and digital SLR zoom lens reviews >>

Thanks in advance for your opinions and also for posting your reviews.

[NexusPhoto]

Hmm...

Although I don't own any of the lenses you are talking about, it sounds like the 17-55mm f2.8 is what you are looking for. But 55 seems kind of short. Even with the crop factor it still only gives you 88mm. But I guess that's fine if you will be relatively close to the subject. My main lens is a Sigma 28-135mm f2.8-5.6. Good lens, decently sharp at f2.8, but really shines around f11. Anyway, I thought I'd throw my .02 in.:thumbsup:

[Photo-John]

Hmm...

Although I don't own any of the lenses you are talking about, it sounds like the 17-55mm f2.8 is what you are looking for. But 55 seems kind of short. Even with the crop factor it still only gives you 88mm. But I guess that's fine if you will be relatively close to the subject. My main lens is a Sigma 28-135mm f2.8-5.6. Good lens, decently sharp at f2.8, but really shines around f11. Anyway, I thought I'd throw my .02 in.:thumbsup:

I've got the Canon 28-135mm IS right now. I prefer to trade the reach and IS on that lens for the f/2.8 aperture on my Tamron 28-75 most of the time. I've been thinking about this for a few more hours right now and I'm thinking I should maybe be looking at super-wide zooms in the 12-20 range. That might make more sense since I have the 28-75mm lens. I might even consider looking for something a little longer to replace that lens. That would be tough since it's optically so good, though. Having two f/2.8 lenses with a combined range of 12-75mm, plus the 70-200 f/2.8L I already have would be pretty sweet.

Think it's time for me to go check the lens reviews again to see what's available. Might even visit the camera store today. I think my dad is interested in looking at the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 cause I just told him about it.

[Photo-John]

I went to the local pro dealer and looked at the Canon 10-20mm EF-S and the Tamron 11-18mm f/4-5.6 lenses. Getting a wider lens to compliment the Tamron 18-75mm f/2.8 that I have now seems to make more sense. Anyone have any opinions about these two lenses?

[Frans]

The only lenses I have had real success with inside or around the camp fire without a flash is 30mm/f1.4 Sigma, Canon 50/1.4 and the Canon 85/1.8. The Sigma 30/1.4 is the most use of all. The only other I would consider is Cannon 24/1.4L to get the group shots in. I haven’t been overly impressed IS so far, it doesn't stop the object your shooting from moving. Most of my inside shots are taken at 1600ASA @ f1.6-f2 ranging from 1/30- 1/100 of a second. I have tried lenses with an aperture of f2.8 but found then a bit too slow when i have been spoiled with fast lenses.
Frans