I am starting my fund to purchase a new lens. I recently shot a theatre show using just my 50mm f1.8. That was ok, and the image quality was fine, but my legs were knackered afterwards because to get full stage shots I had to be at the back of the auditorium, and to get close ups of performers I needed to go to row 2 of the seats. So, I was back and forth all the time.

I have a 40D.

I think I may be able to sort something in the region of £300, but it'll take me a couple or three months.

So, is there a decent, fast (f2.8?) zoom that would cover the range I am talking about?

I klnow I'm not getting "L" lenses ;) , but beyond that I get confused with the other stuff, what is good and what isn't.

Cheers

Originally Posted by Bend The Light I think I may be able to sort something in the region of £300, but it'll take me a couple or three months. So, is there a decent, fast (f2.8?) zoom that would cover the range I am talking about? I klnow I'm not getting "L" lenses ;) , but beyond that I get confused with the other stuff, what is good and what isn't. Cheers

I'm really grooving on a new-to-me Sigma f2.8 24-70. I had looked at the Tamron equivalent, too. Really versatile lens, and is already my walkabout lens.

I think you'll be hard presses to find a 2.8 zoom in good shape for that price. A couple of lenses come to mind that would work but nowhere near that price. The 17-55 2.8 while not an L is an awesome lens but at a cost of $1000+ in good shape. The 16-35 2.8L is another amazing lens, but again your looking at $1200-$1500. 28-70 2.8L or 24-70 2.8L are others that come to mind but still in the $1000 area. If you're not apposed to a 3rd party lens then you might find a used Sigma or Tokina closer to your price range.

I used to use a Tamron 17-50 2.8 (non is / vr whatever) which I bought new (one of the few I have done) ... also with a 40D ... and liked the results.

I have no idea how much the UK price is now, but I got mine at pre increase price < 300 about 3 yrs ago.

I say 'used' ... as now in the hands of older daughter (+so) ... not because I got rid of same :)

pp

Originally Posted by Moving Pictures I'm really grooving on a new-to-me Sigma f2.8 24-70. I had looked at the Tamron equivalent, too. Really versatile lens, and is already my walkabout lens.

Thanks. I think it will have to be a Tamron for the money I have. Good to know what is working for others. Cheers. :)

Originally Posted by Rob Douglas I think you'll be hard presses to find a 2.8 zoom in good shape for that price. A couple of lenses come to mind that would work but nowhere near that price. The 17-55 2.8 while not an L is an awesome lens but at a cost of $1000+ in good shape. The 16-35 2.8L is another amazing lens, but again your looking at $1200-$1500. 28-70 2.8L or 24-70 2.8L are others that come to mind but still in the $1000 area. If you're not apposed to a 3rd party lens then you might find a used Sigma or Tokina closer to your price range.

Yes, I know my budget is limited. I have so many other things that have to come before my photography. I think a 3rd party will be the way to go. :)

Originally Posted by puzzledpaul I used to use a Tamron 17-50 2.8 (non is / vr whatever) which I bought new (one of the few I have done) ... also with a 40D ... and liked the results. I have no idea how much the UK price is now, but I got mine at pre increase price < 300 about 3 yrs ago. I say 'used' ... as now in the hands of older daughter (+so) ... not because I got rid of same :) pp

Cheers. second time I have heard the 17-50 2.8 Tamron today. Might be worth a look. :)

I absolutely LOVE my Tamron 17-50 but it isn't a good theatre lens - often slow (and noisy) in those conditions. I'd recommend adding another prime along the line of the 85 1.8. Stand further back with the 50 for wider shots, and then use the 85 for tighter shots.

Originally Posted by divamum I absolutely LOVE my Tamron 17-50 but it isn't a good theatre lens - often slow (and noisy) in those conditions. I'd recommend adding another prime along the line of the 85 1.8. Stand further back with the 50 for wider shots, and then use the 85 for tighter shots.

Yeah, I just wanted to avoid lens changes in the dark! :)

Cheers