I just got back from a long-weekend road trip with Girl. We went Jasper/Banff and back over the 4 days. I went with my 17-50 Tammy and 70-400 f4L. Girl used the XS and kit lens for most of her shots (some shots taken with my Tammy). 17mm is wide enough for most landscape, in the rockies, I found. 10-22 would be overkill, especially since you can take some nice panos anyway. I did find the 70-200 came in really handy for wildlife, though.

70-200 would be good for wildlife/macro shots of nature, but landscape wise, I am still looking at getting the 17-40L. My buddy would be brining his 10-22, but like you said, it could be over kill.

10-22 FF equiv would be 16-35, which is near close as a 17-40 FF. I am still wondering about image quality comparing between 10-22 and 17-40L.

Anyone have any idea where I can pick up a Tokina 11-16 for a Canon mount for 600 US? I've see US retailers have it at 599 but their all backordered. JR, Adorama, B&H, Glazers. Can't find this thing anywhere. I'd much rather pay 600US new vs paying 700+ for a used one locally.

It happens often. I complained about this here a few months ago, then they all got stock pretty soon. I'd check back with them in a few weeks. :thumbsup:

Awesome, thanks. I think my line up for my 7D will be a Tokina 11-16 2.8, Canon 17-55 2.8 IS, Canon 50 1.4.

^ that's a pretty solid line up :)

When I got my Tokina 11-16 2.8 Canon mount at Glazers, it didn't take long before they got it back in stock. Took about a week and a half. I just ordered it online so they set it aside for me.

Lookin into a 17-50mm f/2.8, I know sigma, tamron, and tokina all offers similar lenses around the same price, and none of them have offers one in usm hsm or what ever good inner focus, but which one is the better one?? Its for a canon mount.
Posted via RS Mobile

Tamron non VC model usually triumphs over those 2. Its exceptionally sharp just the focus is on the noisier side. I have one for sale if you're interested. $425

Posted via RS Mobile

hmmm...... very tempting....

this one has HSM...I just picked up a tamron 17-50 non VC from here http://www.dunneandrundle.com/, and i like it.

http://www.bccamera.com/index.php?ma...oducts_id=4582

Wow that's a hefty premium to get HSM. I'm using the 17-50 VC. A bit noisy focusing but good enough for what I use it for. I got mine at Dunne and Rundle too when it was on sale.

Does anybody have the Nikon AF-S 35mm f1.8? The lens hood on mine is outrageously loose. I'm wondering if this is a defect. Thanks!

I am very happy with the quality of my 55-250 pictures however the 55 isn't so practical on an apsc. I currently use that and a 17-40 but am looking to replace the 17-40. I want to try the sigma 17-70 or 24-70 macro. Which would you guys recommend. I know they are a bit cheaper than my L lens but I want to invest in a prime too. I also have the sigma 10-20 which I am quite happy with
Posted via RS Mobile

Is the Nikon 70-300MM F4.5-5.6G worth it? Currently $499 at Broadway Camera

Could anyone recommend me a lens that shoots good night time photos?

assuming you're not firing a flash, any big aperture lens (f/2.8 and below) will do. with a combination of increasing your ISO

The obvious cost effective solution would be the nifty fifty (50 f/1.8). Any more information about what you're shooting/how you're shooting/what you want out of your shots would help narrow things down a bit.

Well, I would like to shoot night time landscape/scenery and cars. Also, I would want to shoot outdoor portraits during the day. Will the 50 F 1.8 be able to meet my needs? I've done some research online, I found a lot of comparison between the 50mm F1.8/1.4 and 85mm F1.8. But I guess that really depends on my needs.

Personally for landscape work I like to use a wider focal length. Are you using a APS-C camera (i.e. entry-level to semi-pro camera)?

Depending on your budget and use, it really depends. Your two needs could be solved with a single zoom lens if it's like a 50/50 use for your two needs. Assuming you run a APS-C camera, a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 could help if you're under a budget. Really sharp if you get a good copy, and a great great lens all around.

If money's not really an issue and you take landscapes way more than portraits, I'd get a Tokina 11-16 ultra wide for your landscape work. Personally I think 17 is not wide enough for landscapes, but you can make it work as I only have 18 on the wide end of my lenses.

If you take a TON more daytime portraits, I'd just think to get a 50 1.4 or 80 1.8. Recall with a crop camera (APS-C), you have to multiply 1.6 (1.5 for Nikon) by your focal length to get a more accurate reading. This means that a 50mm on a crop camera actually "seems" like using a 80mm. This is the same for using a 80mm lens.


Remember since you're taking night landscapes, I'm assuming you're using a tripod and really any well-reviewed wide lens will be ok since you'd probably be shooting at a small aperture (f/8 and above). The Tokina is sharp and fixed aperture, and has a large fan following because of it.


Hope this helps!

Is it worth it to get a Tamron 17-50mm over a Nikon 18-105mm? I'm thinking wether or not to sell my 18-105 and get a Tamron 17-50mm. I think I'd rather have a winder aperture instead of a longer zoom as I'll probably start saving up for a 70-200mm which will take me quite a while since I'm going to be going to school full time come september.

Also thinking of picking up a 85mm 1.8 in the mean time to make up for not having a longer zoom.

This is what my setup would look like:
Nikon 50mm 1.4
Tamron 17-50mm 2.8
Nikon 85mm 1.8
Nikon 70-200mm 2.8(By January if I save hardcore)

Did you want the 70-200 VR II, or will a VR I suffice? We have some used 70-200 VR I for around $1300~$1400.

A VR I should be good enough for me. Do they sell well or would you have em until around january?
Posted via RS Mobile

I expect them to be gone in a few days. They're ex-rental units - clean glass, but worn exterior.

^Yea I probably won't have $1300 in the next couple of days haha.

What do you say about going from an 18-105mm to a 17-50mm?

the tamron 17-50mm is a sharp lens, got a lot of good reviews, my friend has one and its pretty nice. I was also considering it but ended up getting a sigma 18-50mm