Is Sony getting your tax return?

[Anbesol]

Or in my case, Tamron. I'm actually contemplating expanding my lens range to cover wider range focal length. As is I've got 28-75 f/2.8 covered, 24-50 f/4 covered, and the kit lens, which is pretty awful at 18mm.

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 sounds to me the best choice, but I was also hoping to find one prime wide that just knocked me out. Considering also the Sony 20mm f/2.8, Sigma 20mm f/1.8, and Sigma 24mm f/1.8.

*edit - also throw the Zeiss 16-80 f/3.5-4.5 in the mix. Though not a strong contender with the weak variable f-stop and the heaviest price.

I've only experienced any use from a sigma lens once, and it was rather unimpressive. Also in light of their focus calibration errors being much more common, I'm a bit uneasy about getting a sigma. Somebody please assure me that I'm just being silly. If I was confident in the Sigma, I would probably give up thought of the Sony - being 1.3 stops slower.

Anyway how about you guys? Any of you upgrading your gear when uncle sam gives you back a bit of that money he borrowed?

[Anbesol]

Oh yeah, I may also add the Sony 50mm f/1.4, if I decide that its worth having both a 1.7 and a 1.4..

[Canuck935]

I don't think it's worth getting both a 50 1.4 and 1.7. I think the money is better used elsewhere. I'm pretty much turned off to sigma as well. Tamron gets my vote. The 17-50 would be a great replacement for the kit lens, though shorter range. You could always go ultrawide like a 10-24 or tele with like 70-300..

[Anbesol]

I am specifically looking for an f/2.8 or faster upgrade for my wide, so the ultra-wides are out. I would almost consider Tamrons 10-24, as its not terribly slow - but from everything I have seen it is very soft (at any f-stop), and the 17-50 is very sharp.

Thanks canuck, I think I've narrowed down my choices to the Sony 20mm f/2.8, and the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I'll trust my inclination against Sigma.

You getting any new gear from uncle sam, or you selling your gear to pay him?

[OldClicker]

Sony is getting mine, though not directly - used 70-200 f/2.8G. Unfortunately, I don't get a tax refund. - TF

[Canuck935]

No refund for me. I haz to pay the man. I have untaxed unemployment checks as well as untaxed paychecks from a company I did some temp work for. Time to pay up!

For now I'll just keep an eye on pma to see what new things are coming our way..

[Anbesol]

Aw, sorry guys. I hate it when I have to pay.

Haven't had to since I had my son though, you guys just need to make little ones and uncle sam will be more generous with you! ;)

Clicker - so you are getting their 70-200?

[OldClicker]

Clicker - so you are getting their 70-200?

Yes. Lot of $, but I'm commited. - TF

[NoKnees]

Well, not Sony, but related... Making my second most expensive lens investment to date, a near mint Minolta 85/1.4 GD... I figure no matter what Sony body I end up with next, this will still be a solid investment. For now, I'm sure my a700 will get along well with it...

I wanted to use this $ to invest in the successor to the a700, but I'm tired of waiting... As soon as I finalize this purchase, I'm sure the next body will be announced with sales to follow shortly since I will no longer have the money for it.... You can thank me later... ;)

And Canuck I hear ya on the taxes... I have a strange mix this year from being laid off, unemployment, then contract work... It'll be mostly a wash, but I still think I'll get a couple bucks back thanks to a crazy mortgage that owns me... Good times...

[Anbesol]

Theres always the A850 or A900.

Thats a mean lens! Yeah I'll be betting it will outlast your next camera body anyway.

[PWhite214]

Actually, Giottos got my money, don't know if I will get as refund. I decided on a big enough tripod for comfortable use. The top of the QR plate on the head is over 6' with no centerpost extension. The rest of any refund will go towards vacation in New Mexico next month.

Phil