Any hope for a new Sigma/Tamron/Canon 17-50 f2.8?

[KevinP]

I keep hoping a new lens will break cover before I get impatient and replace the 18-55 STM kit lens on our SL1. Any indications, or nothing to go on?

The 18-55 STM leaves room to get something sharper with either f2.8 for speed, or more range on the zoom as a bonus. The Sigma 17-50 f2.8 seems handier for relaxed portrait and event stuff, but the Canon15-85 f3.5-5.6 (similar price for used) would be pretty nice for virtually any other general use stuff. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 makes me think there's room to get a better 17-50, if anyone intends to build it.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

The recent fall in the price of Sigma 17-50mm means that soon we will see a replacement. Probably a 17-50 F2.8 Art, or maybe a slightly different focal length.


I myself, waited several years for a replacement for my beloved Tokina 16-50mm. I recently gave up waiting, and bought a used Canon 17-55mm for a rezzo price. If your patience is longer than mine, you can wait for Sigma.

 

[KevinP]

If your patience is longer than mine, you can wait for Sigma.

Yeah. I've seen notes going back a couple years on the price drop and anticipation, but it's been hanging for a while. A new body like a T7i or 77D is on the list this year, so I'll probably buy the lens that looks best when I feel ready for that.

 

[ahsanford]

I keep hoping a new lens will break cover before I get impatient and replace the 18-55 STM kit lens on our SL1. Any indications, or nothing to go on?

The 18-55 STM leaves room to get something sharper with either f2.8 for speed, or more range on the zoom as a bonus. The Sigma 17-50 f2.8 seems handier for relaxed portrait and event stuff, but the Canon15-85 f3.5-5.6 (similar price for used) would be pretty nice for virtually any other general use stuff. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 makes me think there's room to get a better 17-50, if anyone intends to build it.

Of course there's the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, not the newest design but with constant f/2.8 and USM focusing to go along with the IS.

Given that we haven't seen a ring USM lens for EF-S since 2009 (the 15-85), I think it's a fair statement to say that Canon has abandoned 'high end EF-S' and would rather sell you 'nice EF-S' (think 18-135 nano USM) or an actual L lens (to be used on crop) -- a 17-40 f/4L USM would work fine as a standard zoom on crop. So I would not expect Canon to give you an f/2.8 (or even f/2.8-f/4 variable) standard zoom for EF-S any time soon.

As for Sigma / Tamron, they absolutely could build the EF-S standard zoom you are talking about. Given that Sigma already offers that 18-35 1.8, my money's more on Tamron to offer such a lens. They've been focused on FF glass of late, but they have made two 17-50s in the past -- they might be due for another before too long.

- A

 

[Sharlin]

Both the Sigma and Tamron 17–50mm are getting long in the tooth. At this point I find it difficult to recommend most Sigron lenses released before their respective brand/design language overhauls. Sigma has the apparently well-regarded 17–70mm f/2.8–4 C OS lens in their Global Vision line; together with the lovely 18–35mm/1.8 A I wonder if they don't see a need for an updated ~18–50/2.8 at this point. Tamron on the other hand definitely would have room for one in their new lineup.

 

[KevinP]

Both the Sigma and Tamron 17–50mm are getting long in the tooth. At this point I find it difficult to recommend most Sigron lenses released before their respective brand/design language overhauls. Sigma has the apparently well-regarded 17–70mm f/2.8–4 C OS lens in their Global Vision line; together with the lovely 18–35mm/1.8 A I wonder if they don't see a need for an updated ~18–50/2.8 at this point. Tamron on the other hand definitely would have room for one in their new lineup.

Yeah, the old body lenses all seem due for refresh with the newer OS/VC and autofocus systems.

I like the idea of the 17-70, but it has the same weakness as the 15-85: higher f-stop right at the lengths you'd want to shoot low f-stop portraits. I've been shooting a lot at f2.8 on Yongnuo 35 f2.0 or Canon 50 f1.8 because they really drop sharpness fast below that. A good f2.8 zoom looks like a good replacement for those in all but the lowest light or lowest f-stop background effects.

I have the same concern that Sigma might skip a 17-50 f2.8 revamp. The 50-100 with 80-160 FF equivalent looks like it's intended to be a one-stop portrait lens. I'm not really natural yet shooting portraits past 50mm, so it seems like a lot of lens to carry as an enthusiastic hobbyist. The 18-35 compliment just misses giving me the 50 (80 eq) that I'd like to grow into more.

If I could really have my wish, a sharp 17-60 f2.8 OS/VC would be excellent to give me a little more portrait range (27-96 equiv). Going from a 3x zoom to a 3.5x with the same sharpness seems possible with 7-10 years to bring down the cost of aspherical elements and fancy coatings.

 

[aceflibble]

The Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 holds up well. It's not a great lens, by any means, but it's a more-than-worthy upgrade from any of the 'kit' Canons, and I think you'll be surprised at how soft (in a good way) the look is at 70mm and f/4, for portraits. I'd say the main thing holding it back from being a 'pro APS-C' lens is simply the base build quality. Again, it's better than some of the older and outdated Canons, but it's not a patch on the other new Sigmas/Tamrons, and the focus ring in particularly is among the worst I've ever encountered.

If you want pro results out of an APS-C body, and portrait shooting is a concern, the best you're going to get now or any time soon is the Sigma 18-35 + a short telephoto. The Sigma 50-100 f/1.8 is another option, though by that point you're carrying around so much weight and value, you may as well have just bought a second hand 35mm body and a general-purpose zoom.

The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC (especially the latest G2) is worth considering for portraits on APS-C. You're basically getting the look of 40-112mm (roughly) f/4.5, which is about as much as APS-C can hope for in a zoom lens. Again, though, by that point you're carrying around the same size and value as a second hand 5D2 and 24-105, so it all becomes a bit irrelevant.

Another f/1.8 zoom or other pro-quality EF-S lens is unlikely to come about now, as sales of APS-C-only lenses are dropping, fast. APS-C bodies as a whole aren't selling as well as they used to, and with the price of older 35mm bodies lowering quickly, people aren't investing in APS-C lenses. That's not to say that it's utterly impossible for a new, high-quality EF-S mount lens to turn up, but it's very, very unlikely. The market just isn't there anymore.

For what it's worth, if moving to a 35mm body wasn't an option yet I was still putting together a kit for portraits/events where people are the focus, and getting that trendy background blur was a concern, I wouldn't try to get everything done with just one zoom. I'd get the Sigma 18-35 and a Canon 85mm f/1.4, or the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 if the Canon was out of budget. If it had to be one zoom it'd be the Tamron 24-70, though I don't care so much about wide-angle shots so YMMV.

 

[KevinP]

For what it's worth, if moving to a 35mm body wasn't an option yet I was still putting together a kit for portraits/events where people are the focus, and getting that trendy background blur was a concern, I wouldn't try to get everything done with just one zoom. I'd get the Sigma 18-35 and a Canon 85mm f/1.4, or the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 if the Canon was out of budget. If it had to be one zoom it'd be the Tamron 24-70, though I don't care so much about wide-angle shots so YMMV.

Good notes, Thank You. I don't have much visibility to market trends besides articles and youtube reviewer notes. It does seem like cell phones are eating the market from bottom up, but it's hard to know when a segment will wither. I do have a Tokina 11-20 f2.8. I've been dreaming of the new Tamron 100-400, so the 24-70 could be a really good fit. It's really not outlandish size compared to the 17-50 or 18-35. It'd leave me with two full frame lenses also, so it'd be easier to step across if Canon makes their mirrorless FF small enough to be tempting against the expected A7III.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8 - Tamron 24-70 f2.8 - Sigma 24-70 f2.8 - Sigma 18-35 f1.8