Which zoom lens?

[randomname]

I cant decide between buying:

17-55 2.8 IS lens
24-105 4L IS
28-135 3.5-5.6 IS And the Tokina 11-16 2.8

They're all appealing for different reasons, their main uses would be videography jobs, handheld shots for film, and an every day lens for photography, in that order.

I'm OK with spending the extra money on the first two lenses, but how much of an increase in IQ am I going to see? I'm not sure if I see myself using zooms in my videos very much, but that might just be because I'm so used to not having the option. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.

 

[randomname]

I ended up buying the tamron 17-50 VC lens, but I'm thinking about taking it back, I just really cant decide if the speed and constant aperture is a good trade off for the massive range I would have if I traded it in for the 28-125 and 11-16, any opinions?

 

[ROCKMORE]

I ended up buying the tamron 17-50 VC lens, but I'm thinking about taking it back, I just really cant decide if the speed and constant aperture is a good trade off for the massive range I would have if I traded it in for the 28-125 and 11-16, any opinions?

I've been thinking of that to replace my 18-55 but not sure how sharp it is.

I compared it to the non VC on the charts and the non VC looks sharper.


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=3

Also how noisy is the VC. It's useful for HD movie work, but if you can hear it at all it will cause problems in quite interior locations

I've been shooting with the 500d a while and i think 50mm may be the useful limit to hand held work if you want really steady shots. So for me a quality 17-50mm for daily carry around and then add a 70-200 f4L for the extra reach on a tripod will be very sharp and a good price.

 

[J Davis]

I wouldn't worry too much about the sound from the lens. If you need to use IS or VC then most probably its tele and you are outside anyway.
Any noise from AF is neg because you wouldn't shoot with AF when shooting vid.

DSLR's are great in controlled lighting environments and in those situations your mic should be nowhere near the camera.
If it's not a controlled lighting environment and you are doing doc or run and gun with a mic on camera you might be better off using an ENG body not a DSLR

Just be careful of the tamron 17-50, the quality control on the lenses varies, come copies a great and some suck. There are a lot of reviews around saying this.

 

[ROCKMORE]

Just be careful of the tamron 17-50, the quality control on the lenses varies, come copies a great and some suck. There are a lot of reviews around saying this.

That's what I'm thinking. Although the Tamron 17-50mm looks like a good deal on the surface. I won't really know till buying is and spending a lot of time with it. I am planning on a 5D when the next generation is out so maybe better suffer along with the 18-55mm till then and invest in FF glass. BTW the 18-55 is a good lens, I've produces some great images with it. The only lens worth stepping up to in the format may be the Canon 17-50 f2.8 at 10x the cost.
Watch and learn