Hi all,

I just bought me new Canon 40D (body only)

I'm looking to buy a GOOD lens.

I'm between three lenses

1. Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX DC HSM Macro
2. Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
3. Canon Zoom Super Wide Angle EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

For a telephoto lens I will go for the Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG MACRO HSM but that is for a later purchase.

For a macro lens I will go for the Sigma MACRO 70mm F2.8 EX DG

I shoot different subjects. Portraits, Landscapes, people, basically I shoot anything.

I'd like to get a 2.8 for better image quality. But the 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM gives me more focal length which I find useful. (but it's not a 2.8)

The good thing about the Sigma is the price which is the half price than the canon 2.8 BUT it doesn't have an image stabilizer!

I'd appreciate it if you give me your advise on the first three lenses. The good thing I like about Canon lenses is the Image Stabilizer.

Thanx!

hi you you would probably get a faster/better/more response over on the canon forum.
But here goes:
The sigam 18-50 is not HSM for canon only nikon so it can be used on the low end cams D50 etc that dont have a motor in the body (I know canon does not have a motor in the body as EOS never has). It uses a micro motor which will be slower and noisier the HSM but no less capable. as a lens its quite a good one to go for, you could also look at the Tamron 17-50 2.8 which gets a very loyal following. also the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 is not too bad if you want a bit more lenght.

The 17-85 IS usm is not the best opticaly but a fairly good alround snappers lens. It does have IS but is a slower lens to start with.

The 17-55 IS is probably the the best to go for but is very expensive and quite large but opticaly very good indeed.
Have a look at some of the revies for these

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/
http://www.photozone.de/

as for you other choices they both seem good choices however have a think about the canon 60 macro as its excellent and can be had quite cheap 2nd hand.
also you might want to look at the older versions of the 70-200 sigma as the latest version seems to have a few quality problems which is a shame as the older ones are great. That and the 100-300 f4 are probably some of the best budget quality glass you can get.

The Canon 17-55 IS is stellar. The 17-85 IS is a travel / general purpose lens. The Sigma is a Sigma, you might get a good copy.

If you can afford it the 17-55 IS is worth it, I was very happy with it's optical performance when I had one. It is not built like an $800 lens should be though, it's not built any better than the 17-85 IS.

If you won't be shooting in the low light a lot the 17-85 is very nice and one of my favorite Canon crop lenses. It's strength is its versatility.

Since you don't seem to mind size as your planning on getting a 70-200 f/2.8 I'd get the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS no question. That way you have two fast zoom.

Get the 17-55 IS or get the Tamron 17-50 2.8 if you want to save money for your telephoto lens.

Don't get a 17-85. It will limit you and you don't currently have any fast prime lenses to use in lower light.

As far as the 70mm and 70-200 are concerned, I've heard very good things about them.