Lens dilemma: Sigma 18-50 2.8 vs Canon 17-85IS vs Canon 17-4

[Torqued]

Ok. A bit of a lens dilemma here. :) I'm trying to decide on my next piece of glass.

I recently made the step up from a P&S to the 20D w/ a Canon 50 1.4 and the 580EX

My wife and I are expecting a baby in November.. and her brother and his wife are also due with their 2nd child in March - so there will be lots of baby/family shots inside in close quarters. With us, the grandparents, and the kids, we're easily talking about 12+ people possibly in a "Whole Fam Damily" shot. Also, I'd like to be able to shoot some landscapes while out on the motorcycle or out in the country w/ family.

I like the price point, speed, and zoom range of the Sigma. It's $180 less (@B&H) than the 17-40L and has gotten some good reviews. I could use that $180 to put towards a zoom on the other side of 50mm or maybe towards a macro lens.

The 17-85, even with the extra stops that the IS buys, it still seems to be slower than the Sigma. I do have the 580EX, so could use flash if I had to. I do like the extra reach on the other side of 50mm, though. This would also get me a slight overlap w/ some of the zooms I'm considering picking up later. It's in the middle of the pack price wise.

I thought about the Canon 28-135 IS, but I'm contemplating picking up a zoom lens later - maybe a Bigma or a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS for some backyard birding and nature pics. IMHO, the 28-135IS would have too much overlap with the zooms I'm looking at. The 28-135 IS has a good price point, but, again, is slower, even w/ the IS and isn't as wide on the wide end as the others.

The 17-40L.. well.. it's an L lens. And I'm not sure that the L glass is worth a $180 premium based on comments I've seen comparing it to the Sigma 18-50.

I've read through a ton of reviews and about a million posts various sites and still can't decide. Information overload, I guess. :( I'd appreciate any input from people that have these lenses or have been in a similar fix. :)

[LowSpark]

Enie, Meanie, Miney, Moe....

I went through the delima of too much to choose from and discovered that there is no perfect answer to the question.

I bought the camera with the 17-85mm and it works great and my out and about lens....

Second I bought a 50mm for taking people shots and to take use of the low light capabilities

I just bought a 70-200mm to complete my 'needed' list.

Yes, I still have a 'want' list, and those lens will come to me in the next few years...

make your list of photo 'needs' and set a priority on what is important, and then go shop for that item.

[darktiger]

Yeah I had a hard time choosing my lens, especially between the 17-85IS and the Sigma 18-200. But I went with a Sigma 18-200, Mostly because of the $250 difference. I hope it gets here soon.

[RiverSide]

i don't think anyone can tell you what would be best for your use..

personally i'm contemplating replacing my kit lens with the 18-50mm f/2.8 .. i.e. if i don't go overboard and get the 24-70mmf /2.8L first :twisted:

[AjP]

I just got my Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG and I love most of it, except loud focus, other then that, great lense for price, really sharp!!!!

[PhotoSHO]

One problem I have seen in the past with aftermarket lenses on Canon digital bodies is back focusing. That may be last years news though. However I have never been dissatisfied with Sigma glass when I shot Minolta bodies. Having said all that I would opt for the Canon 17-40 f4 L. Even if you don't like it you can sell it for damn near what you paid for it, and if you do like it, which you probably will, you will never regret it.