04-07-2011, 05:38 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1302108888' post='7455']
The 17-50/2.8 is a very fine lens - if you can get a decent sample. Alternatively consider the EF-S 15-85mm maybe. Remember that lens speed is a very relative thing on an APS-C DSLR. At 50mm f/2.8 you've still a fairly deep depth-of-field (equiv to 80mm f/4 on a full format camera). That's neither fish nor meat as we say here in Germany.
I'd probably rather go with a slow speed zoom which gives you range in combination with a fast prime - like the 50/1.8 or one of the 50/1.4s.
Klaus
[/quote]
Either Sigma 17-50mm or Canon 15-85mm is fine. I definitely love these two lenses over the 17-70mm OS. However, I have read a lot of users on the 15-85mm. They said the IQ was very good, but some copies had poor focusing accuracy. Only the users of any cameras that are able to micro-adjust can be happy with this variation. Canon 500d doesn't have micro-adjustment, so if you get the copy that doesn't fit your focus, you'll regret.
The 17-50/2.8 is a very fine lens - if you can get a decent sample. Alternatively consider the EF-S 15-85mm maybe. Remember that lens speed is a very relative thing on an APS-C DSLR. At 50mm f/2.8 you've still a fairly deep depth-of-field (equiv to 80mm f/4 on a full format camera). That's neither fish nor meat as we say here in Germany.
I'd probably rather go with a slow speed zoom which gives you range in combination with a fast prime - like the 50/1.8 or one of the 50/1.4s.
Klaus
[/quote]
Either Sigma 17-50mm or Canon 15-85mm is fine. I definitely love these two lenses over the 17-70mm OS. However, I have read a lot of users on the 15-85mm. They said the IQ was very good, but some copies had poor focusing accuracy. Only the users of any cameras that are able to micro-adjust can be happy with this variation. Canon 500d doesn't have micro-adjustment, so if you get the copy that doesn't fit your focus, you'll regret.