One for a walkabout... Mid-range Zooms

[Corso]

Getting my teeth into digital photography now and would quite like to get hold of a mid range zoom to complement the 70-300 on my 30D. However before doing so I would appreciate anyone airing their views on one or other of these lenses. Though sorely tempted by the canon 17-40mm i'm not sure it will have enough reach as a walkaround lens for me (that been a factor for anyone?), so the lenses i have in the melting pot are: canon 17-85mm, sigma 17-70mm (with/without HSM), sigma 18-125 and also the canon 24-85mm (which i am inclined to discard due to its lack of width at the wide end.)
I apologise if this information has been covered before, i had a bit of a seach but couldnt find a specific thread.
Cheers,
Corso

[mystictonka]

I would go with the canon, I use one of these lenses & swear by it

[Brocker]

I agree. Canon is the one for me. But then I would be biased. I have used nothing but Canon equipment apart from a Sigma 70-300mm lens which was very good but not quite as pin sharp as the Canons I use.

[eeyore]

imo it is asking too much to get a good mid range zoom which is also truly wide at the wide end. (remember that on a 1.6 crop even 18mm only equates to 28.8mm)

therefore i ignore the wide requirement on the mid range and use the otherwise excellent canon 28-135 IS as my mid range , also carrying the sigma 10-20 as a dedicated wide zoom.

[Corso]

Originally Posted by eeyore

therefore i ignore the wide requirement on the mid range and use the otherwise excellent canon 28-135 IS as my mid range , also carrying the sigma 10-20 as a dedicated wide zoom.

Thanks for that, it is a tempting option, will have to see how generous father christmas is feeling this year! Out of interest have you used the canon 24-105? How does that compare to your 28-135?

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by Corso

Thanks for that, it is a tempting option, will have to see how generous father christmas is feeling this year! Out of interest have you used the canon 24-105? How does that compare to your 28-135?

other photographers have mentioned (on here and on other forums) that it suffered from distortion at the wide end and wasnt propperly sharp at the long end - i only tried it breifly so i dont know if this is true.

my decision was based on the longer long end and also the IS which is very handy if you are shooting in crowded on cramped conditions (i do a lot of sport photography as well as wildlife)

[zan]

one lens i've been very impressed with is my Tamron 17-50mm, which is really sharp and gets brill reviews. I know it's not as long as you're looking at, but if you use it with your 70-300mm you can still have the range of focal lengths. depends what kind of photography you have in mind and whether you mind changing lenses.

I don't have any experience with the other lenses you mention, but have a look at The Luminous Landscape and Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ for online reviews of kit.

Zan

[Corso]

anyone used the sigma 17-70? i quite like the fact that it has a macro facility.
Thanks for everyones input.