A&P The Tamron 17-50 2.8 or Sigma 10-22

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by QWIKSNK, May 19, 2008.

  1. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    On a 1.6x Crop (400d) makes it a 27-80mm, which is a great range, but I just dont think its wide enough for landscapes.

    Im moving to Boulder, CO in a couple weeks, and trying to decide which lens to buy before I leave

    Right now I have the kit lens (18-55), the 50 1.8, and the sigma 70-300. I plan on replacing all soon, first is the wide angle.

    I am for sure going to buy the 100-400 L once I get settled after the move.

    If I get the 10-20, ill need another lens (which will probably be the 24-70 2.8L, and will be a long time before I buy). However, the 17-50, kinda fits for both, but, Ill probably really want an extra 7mm once the landscapes a really breathtaking (vs good 'ole flat west MI)
     
  2. jared_IRL

    jared_IRL OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,737
    Likes Received:
    55
    if your goal is landscapes, get the 10-22.

    If it's just a general purpose lens, get the 17-50...


    Actually, I'd rock the 10-22 anyway... You have the 18-55, and while not ideal, you already shoot with it, and can deal with it until you can replace it.

    the 10-22 will give you a wider focal length than you currently have, whereas the 17-50 will be a replacement.
     
  3. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    My goal is anything in nature, and landscapes is a big part of that.

    I like the way you think, at least I have the range, so I can get the picture, even if its not the best (and I dont sell any of my photos, yet....)
     
  4. Derrict

    Derrict No, I am not Amish OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,484
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Amish Country, PA
    10 22, no brainer
     
  5. ravenspy57

    ravenspy57 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you mean the sigma 10-20 or the canon 10-22?

    For landscapes, i'd go with the ultra-wide angle. But the tamron you mentioned makes a perfect walk-around lens.
     
  6. Atheist

    Atheist oh, hi OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    5,360
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    UP, Michigan
    Totally different lenses but i love my UWA
     
  7. QWIKSNK

    QWIKSNK New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    22,984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Murder Mitten
    The Sigma 10-20, not the canon 10-22, sorry.

    Im thinking I get the 10-20, and the 100-400 4.5-5.6 L (I can afford those two right away, and the 100-400 will be my "walkaround" lens) then eventually replace the 18-55 kit with the 24-70 2.8L
     

Share This Page