Which wide angle lens for Canon XTi?

[mage333]

Which should I buy?

Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 vs Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5

Assume they cost the same price (new vs used).

Will use for:
1) Portraits/Close-Ups (because I don't like to stand 6-10 feet away to take portaits.)
2) Low light
3) Landscapes

Recommendations? Nightmares?

 

[essasin]

The siggy 15-30mm won't perform that well in low light but it is a solid glass. It is sharp and IQ is good. It is prone to purple flare, has a loud AF, and common problems that are associated with wide angles and filters/hoods. The Siggy 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 is not the most ideal glass. It is known to have AF problems and is a bit on the soft side. Users over at FM have rated it a 6.2 out of 10. IMO you should look at these

1. Canon EF 35mm f/2.0. It will basically give you a 50mm focal range which is great for full body portraits but its too long for closeups. It is perfect for low light and works pretty well in landscapes within its limits.

2. Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Not that great in low light but this or the canon 10-22mm is an AWESOME lens. Great build quality, vibrant colors, sharp, and fast AF. I have used this lens and it gives a whole new dimension in your shots and its a blast to use.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I can recommend several that enjoy better reputations than those two:

An Ultwa Wide Zoom lens for landscapes:
Tokina 12-24 F4 for $499.95

A Wide Zoom lens for low-light / landscapes:
Tokina 16-50 F2.8 (new lens, pricing unavailable)

A Wide Zoom lens for low-light / landscapes:
Tamron 17-50 F2.8 for $449.00

A Wide Zoom lens for low-light / landscapes / macro:
Sigma 18-50 F2.8 EX DC Macro for $419.00

 

[mage333]

I guess I shuould have specified, I can get either for about $200 used on local craigslist. You guys think I should pass on this and pay more for a better lens?

 

[essasin]

Originally posted by: mage333
I guess I shuould have specified, I can get either for about $200 used on local craigslist. You guys think I should pass on this and pay more for a better lens?

I'd pick up the Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0. You could always resell it and not lose anything.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: mage333
I guess I shuould have specified, I can get either for about $200 used on local craigslist. You guys think I should pass on this and pay more for a better lens?

That is always my personal philosophy. Buying mediocre glass is like putting 50 MPH white wall tires on your brand new BMW 335i.

Another site to read lens reviews is http://www.fredmiranda.com.

 

[kalster]

look into a used tam 17-50, its a good deal for around 375

 

[Jawo]

Originally posted by: kalster
look into a used tam 17-50, its a good deal for around 375

I'll second that. Once you find a sharp copy you will love it!