I've been doing some reading around some sites. I'm looking for an upgrade for y 18-55mm kit lens. I'm looking for a lens that gives a better image quality but is also cheap ($500-$600) range. I've got my eyes on canon's 55-250mm IS and the 18-135mm IS. What can you say about these lenses? 18-135 seems to have some promising reviews.
I'm also considering Tamron/Sigma lenses because I heard they are cheaper. (Are they really cheaper? Prices in the mall seems to be the same. I have a cheaper source though.) What would you suggest from these brands? Do they give the same Image quality?
I know I can get info by googling but mostly I get mixed reviews. I want to know what people here say about these stuff.
I've been using Sigma for years, and yes, they are way cheaper, usually 2/3 Canon price with the same quality.
I'm running: 10-20mm f/4-5.6 $479.00 24-70mm f/2.8 $824.00 85mm f/1.4 $894.00 70-200 f/2.8 $1249.00 150-500mm f/5-6.3 $1069.00 $4515.00 total. Price that out in Canon! lol You'll need a home loan. I shop http://www.bhphotovideo.com
I think third party lenses are usually fine OPTICALY...the only thing they lack is a fast focus motor and comparable VR/IS technology...and stuff like weather sealing and such I guess....so if you can work without all those and just need the glasses, I guess Tamron and Sigma will do just fine =)
if you're a pixel peeper, you will notice differences though, in performance between canon original lenses and third party lenses. But I think the performance difference is minute compared to the price gap XD
EOS 5D MKII EF 24-105 F4.0 IS L EF 17-40 F4.0 L EF 70-200 F4.0 L EF 100mm Macro f2.8 IS L EF 100mm F2.0 USM EF 50mm 1.8 first edition EF 75-300 USM IS (not good lens!) EOS 40D EF-S 60mm F2.8 USM macro Tokina ATX 12-24 f4.0 Tokina ATX PRO 28-70mm F2.6-2.8 old Sigma 24mm F2.8
first Canon EOS 650 - CAMBO 4x5" and 6x9cm, Linhof Technika 6x9
After a quick look at your portfolio, I'd suggest a prime lens, either the 50mm macro or the 100mm macro, if you want absolute image quality. The Tamron 17-50mm, the older one without VC was pretty sharp in my opinion, I used that until I went full frame. The 28-135mm I used was great in the center, but soft, soft, soft at the edges and the CA was pretty bad. I don't know if the newer version is any better. Good luck!
When choosing the new lens I always check the resolution tests (ISO crops) of the lens on thedigitalpicture(dot)com - I consider it a good comparison tool, cause the scene/target is the same, camera is the same and only lens is different so you can compare the lenses. In ISO crops you can see overall sharpens, chromatic aberration, vignetting...
So choose the desired focal range of your next lens (the wider the focal range the worse the image quality. The "crispiest" are the prime lenses). Than compare the ISO crops of lenses that fit your desired focal range (compare Canons vs Sigmas vs Tamrons...) in the above-mentioned database... You will see the differences and it is easier to make decision. I believe I have avoided some serious disappointments thanks to those tests :)