XTi (400D) Lens advice Needed…XTi (400D) Lens advice Needed…

Pasty

I have been using my Canon 400d(XTi) with the kit 18-55 lens and the 50mm 1.8 for the past year or so. I really appreciate the 1.8 aperture of the 50mm but for a lot of my photos Im finding this too zoomed in on the cropped sensor camera plus im getting frustrated with the amount of light coming into the kit lens.
I have been looking at 3 lens that might rectify my problems: Sigma 30mm 1.4, Canon 28mm 1.8 or Canon 17-55 2.8 IS.
After reading some rave reviews on the Sigma 30mm I tried it out in a shop and was a bit disappointed with its trouble focusing and a bit of purple fringing, though this maybe a one off? the 17-55 has some very good write ups though alot of questions about the price, the IS would help with my low light shooting, but a Nikon shooting friend thinks the IS softens the image! would it be worth saving up the extra cash for this lens instead of a cheaper prime? will I get a lot of difference between the image quality from this opposed to the kit lens (which is okay with the right light)
I have read masses of internet reviews many with conflicting advice, its driving me crazy, any help with my dilemma would be great. (sorry for such a rambling question!)

ziggy53

Pasty wrote:

I have been using my Canon 400d(XTi) with the kit 18-55 lens and the 50mm 1.8 for the past year or so. I really appreciate the 1.8 aperture of the 50mm but for a lot of my photos Im finding this too zoomed in on the cropped sensor camera plus im getting frustrated with the amount of light coming into the kit lens.
I have been looking at 3 lens that might rectify my problems: Sigma 30mm 1.4, Canon 28mm 1.8 or Canon 17-55 2.8 IS.
After reading some rave reviews on the Sigma 30mm I tried it out in a shop and was a bit disappointed with its trouble focusing and a bit of purple fringing, though this maybe a one off? the 17-55 has some very good write ups though alot of questions about the price, the IS would help with my low light shooting, but a Nikon shooting friend thinks the IS softens the image! would it be worth saving up the extra cash for this lens instead of a cheaper prime? will I get a lot of difference between the image quality from this opposed to the kit lens (which is okay with the right light)
I have read masses of internet reviews many with conflicting advice, its driving me crazy, any help with my dilemma would be great. (sorry for such a rambling question!)

Firstly, welcome to the Digital Grin.

I have the Canon EF 17-55mm, f2.8 IS USM and it is a splendid lens. Your friend is wrong in their assumption. Other than build quality, this lens has very similar properties to the best Canon "L" lenses in terms of sharpness, autofocus accuracy, color and contrast.

Shooting wide open, this lens is a level of magnitude better than the "kit" lens.

Do remember to get the lens hood as none is supplied and it is important to have and use. Third party hoods are available and that's what I use. (I did have to shave a little bit of plastic off of the hood mount in order to get it to work to my satisfaction.)

Pasty

Thanks for the welcome and especially the advice. I will keep saving for the 17-55, should be able to get it next month.
Cheers,

Cuong

The EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is definitely the lens to get. As far as lens performance is concerned, its image quality is as good or better than other zoom L lenses such as the 17-35mm f/2.8L, 17-40mm f/4L, 24-70mm f/2.8L and 24-105mm f/4L IS. Check out the EOS lens tests at photozone.

Cuong

Tee Why

I'd consider the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 also. Optically on par with the Canon 17-55 IS, but it has a noisier AF system that isn't as good at focusing in low lgiht. However, it's abot half the price.

Pasty

Thanks for the comments, I did think about the Tamron as there is such a price difference (and do still want to try it out before I buy), but the idea of having the IS combined with the 2.8 is very appealing especially for capturing shots in low light without the flash.

Jekyll & Hyde

Sorry. Some more conflicting advice for you...

Pasty wrote:

I have read masses of internet reviews many with conflicting advice, its driving me crazy, any help with my dilemma would be great.

J: @ f2.8, I think you would miss the additional 1 - 2 stops of lens speed at some point.

H: A fast prime like the 35mm f1.4L (or the 28 that you mention) is an indispensable component in many a camera bag.

J: But it really depends on how you shoot. If you need a zoom, then you gotta get the zoom. A fixed prime just won't get some of those shots.

H: Right. Know thyself first. That's key.

J&H