#8 in Camcorder & camera lenses
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product

Reddit mentions of Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera

Sentiment score: 31
Reddit mentions: 42

We found 42 Reddit mentions of Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera. Here are the top ones.

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera
Buying options
View on Amazon.com
or
    Features:
  • FLD glass elements along with two glass mold elements and one hybrid aspherical lens provide excellent correction of aberrations and allow for incredibly sharp images with great contrast
  • Aperture : F11
Specs:
ColorBlack
Height3.30708 Inches
Length3.62204 Inches
Number of items1
Release dateAugust 2018
Weight1.2456117803 Pounds
Width3.30708 Inches

idea-bulb Interested in what Redditors like? Check out our Shuffle feature

Shuffle: random products popular on Reddit

Found 42 comments on Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera:

u/HybridCamRev · 10 pointsr/videography

Hi /u/codyhart - I am a GH4 shooter. It is a great camera, but with a $3000 camera budget, I would buy a camcorder.

As you say, by the time you buy ND filters, a Speedbooster to compensate for the GH4's sensor size, an XLR audio solution with decent preamps and rigging (e.g., a top handle) to compensate for its ergonomics - you might as well buy a real video camera.

In your price range, I recommend a [$2499 like new Super 35 4K JVC LS300 from a JVC authorized dealer] (https://www.amazon.com/JVC-GY-LS300CHU-Ultra-Camcorder-Handle/dp/B00USBVISE/ref=as_li_ss_tl?m=A2G9URD6L8MGV6&s=merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1487606994&linkCode=ll1&tag=battleforthew-20) with a [$238 Canon to micro 4/3 autofocusing adapter] (http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5575034783&toolid=10001&campid=5337235943&customid=&icep_item=351515840152&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg) and something like a [used $264.93 Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 lens with a 30 day warranty from Cellular Stream via Amazon] (https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=as_li_ss_tl?m=A3GMNP3CXMIPDP&s=merchant-items&ie=UTF8&qid=1487606647&linkCode=ll1&tag=battleforthew-20).

The LS300 has these features the GH4 lacks:

u/AdamLynch · 9 pointsr/AskPhotography

Canon: https://www.amazon.ca/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K

Nikon: https://www.amazon.ca/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6NU3U/

Sigma makes two variants of this lens. You have posted eBay links for a Canon lens and a Nikon lens.

u/1Maple · 5 pointsr/photography

I hear a lot of good things about the sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. It's pretty inexpensive and much better quality.

u/Tenchiro · 5 pointsr/photography

I was in the same boat and went with the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and it ended up replacing the 50mm f/1.8. I felt too cramped with the 50 on a crop sensor so I like having a wider option.

The new Canon EF-S 24mm f/2.8 pancake is another interesting option for not a lot of money.

u/code_and_coffee · 5 pointsr/photography

The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is about as best of quality you can get without spending the money on an L lens. It runs for $400 but you can find them going for much cheaper on eBay.

Sample shots

More sample shots

u/moby414 · 4 pointsr/AskPhotography

I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 for my 700D (T5i) and I really enjoy it for dark/landscape photography. Great for general use too although it's got quite a large diameter so filters can be a bit pricey!

I also bought a cheap, off-brand filter kit to test them out and mainly protect the glass.

u/NotFromCalifornia · 3 pointsr/Beginning_Photography

24 mm f2.8 pancake. It is incredibly tiny, has a decently fast aperture, STM autofocus, and costs $150 with a Tiffen CPL (great for landscape shots) on Amazon. 24mm is a decent intermediate focal length on APS-C; not very wide, but not telephoto either.

 

If you needed a larger aperture there is the fully manual [Samyang/Rokonin 24mm f1.4] (https://www.amazon.com/Samyang-SY24M-C-24mm-Angle-Canon/dp/B007ELSCCQ) for ~$430 and is two stops faster than the 24mm pancake, but you lose autofocus.

 

You could also get a new or used Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. It won't be as sharp as the primes (it is still a top performing zoom) but it is more versatile; having a 17mm f2.8 option could be invaluable for landscapes on an APS-C camera.

 

If you wanted something even wider, Samyang/Rokonin make a 14mm f2.8 and a 16mm f2.0 that are both fully manual lenses. They run about $300 for the 14mm and $350 for the 16mm. Both are bitingly sharp and are perfect for landscapes/astro but might be a bit too wide for portraiture unless you like the wider perspective.

u/travshootsphotos · 3 pointsr/AskPhotography

I am a little bit biased because it is what I shoot on, but a Pentax either with built-in Astrotracer (K3ii) or with the extra Astrotracer equipment would be my recommendation if you aren't ready or willing to invest in something like an equatorial mount for your tripod. This is the body I shoot on, a little bit more expensive than the body you are looking at but for astro, I think it is well worth the extra investment.

As for lens, anything with a wide aperture (2.8f at least) and a wide angle lens. I pretty much haven't taken my Sigma 17-50mm off of my camera in a year or two. For a small preview, this body/lens setup is what I used to get this shot at the top of Loveland Pass in Colorado.

u/jeyreymii · 3 pointsr/france

Mon 18-55 kit de chez Canon ne me semble pas si super que ça... je me tate de le changer pour pouvoir faire des photos correctes. Pour ceux qui s'y connaissent, est-ce que le Sigma 17-50 est bon (ont dirait bien que oui) ou alors il ne vaut mieux pas prendre un sigma 18-200 pour plus de versatilité - même s'il est plus sombre et risque d'etre moins bon en piqué... et j'ai déjà un 55-250 (en plus du 50mm f1.8)


J'ai surtout pas envie d'acheter un objo pour acheter un objo, mais je veux une galette pour faire des photos de qualité quand même, donc j'ai vraiment envi de savoir si ça peut valoir le coup

u/psychedelianaut · 3 pointsr/LSD

Thanks!

Was shot on a Canon EOS Rebel T6 body, using a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX lens : )

u/Srirachafarian · 2 pointsr/photography

It will be good for planespotting and wildlife (if that's what you mean by "natural"). I don't think 28mm is as wide as you think it is, especially on that camera. I think you'll be frustrated if you try to do wide landscape shots on it.

For that money, I'd probably do something like a Sigma 17-50 combined with the Tamron 70-300 VC. Make sure you get the VC version of the 70-300; there's a non-VC version that's only like $150 and is total crap.

u/Airazz · 2 pointsr/AskPhotography

50mm F1.8 is an obvious first choice for a prime lens. As explained by others, a prime lens is a lens with no zoom, it's fixed. It works beautifully in low light and it's perfect for portraits.

It's also cheap (Canon sells them for just a bit over $100), so it's a good starting point if you don't know what you want.

I also bought a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 as a replacement for my worn out kit lens.

The lens you're asking about is the cheapest versatile lens, that's why it's included with most consumer-grade cameras. It's really simple, it won't last very long, but it's cheap and it does the job. Mine started getting a bit loose, not focusing on auto mode properly after some 30k shots. I was working as a news photographer at the time, so this was like 2 months. For a home user this would take like 2 years, maybe even more than that. It's definitely not a bad option, though. You can take beautiful shots with it.

When it comes to photography, it's 80% skill, 10% gear and 10% luck. Don't buy expensive lenses hoping that they'll magically make your photos look better. It's the other way around, you need to learn to make beautiful photos first. Then you'll see where that lens is lacking, then you'll know what you need to buy. Don't waste money.

u/frostickle · 2 pointsr/photography

How much do you want to spend?

I'd recommend something like the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8, it is $669 from Amazon, maybe cheaper on ebay or elsewhere.

If you have more to spend you could go for the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 but it is $1088.

A good way to decide what sort of lens to buy next (besides obviously thinking about what type of photos you want to take) is to go to lightroom and take a look at what focal lengths you use the most.

Do you need a wider lens? A longer lens? A brighter lens?

Do you need a smaller/lighter lens? A faster-focusing lens? A quieter lens?

etc.

u/vwllss · 2 pointsr/photography

Do you plan on staying crop frame and enjoy the 18mm wide angle? This lens is optically stabilized which will help significantly with your videos.

If you don't care for stabilization and need longer than 18 I would suggest something like Tamron's 28-75mm 2.8. Very cheap for a full frame 2.8 zoom. I own one and it's incredibly sharp.

You could go first party with this, but you'll have to spend $900+

u/groovel76 · 2 pointsr/auroraporn

Are you using a kit lens? If so, recommend upgrading to a better lens. I have a sigma lens that I’ve been quite happy with. It’s just an all around lens. Nothing specialized. I also am using a rebel T3. If you can afford it, look into lenses with even higher f-stops. Anything to reduce the time you need the shutter open.

Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003A6H27K/

Would really recommend a tripod and a remote shutter to minimize camera shake. Even pressing the shutter button can jostle the camera enough to ruin a photo. You can use the timer but that can slow you down and you might miss a good shot

Pixel RC-201 Remote Shutter... https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005TCMW7S

Regarding focus. Plan ahead. Get your focus prepped during the day by focusing on some thing far off like mountains. Then lock that down with tape or something. Also turn off auto focus. If the lens has image stabilization. I’ve heard that if your camera is already stabilized, the stabilization in the lens could work against you because the components in the lens are allowed to shift in anticipation for shake.

Get rid of light pollution. Turn off your display and don’t use your phone. Get your eyes as used to the dark as possible.

Hope these help.

u/James955i · 2 pointsr/canon

I wonder if there are different versions if it, this is the one I have

Sigma 583306 17-50mm f2.8 EX... https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003A6H27K?ref=yo_pop_ma_swf

u/mihirpatel14 · 2 pointsr/PanasonicG7

Nope. Actually, comparing our lenses a bit more closely... I have a different model lol. This is the one I have
https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K?sa-no-redirect=1
Sorry--I guess I glossed over the zoom specs (the 24-70) and just went by appearance. Nevertheless, great lenses!

u/finaleclipse · 2 pointsr/photography

You'd use it in situations where you're looking to ever wider than your 18mm can do, not necessarily replace your kit lens. If you're looking for a kit lens upgrade, the major one is the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8. It allows for more light at the entire range of focal lengths which helps immensely in darker situations to keep your ISO down and the images a bit cleaner.

u/flying_bacon · 1 pointr/photography

Looking for some lens suggestions. Will be traveling soon would like to upgrade the lens I have (Canon 70D with the kit lens Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens)

Need an all around lens. Can someone please give any suggestions?

Saw the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD on sale not sure if this would be good or if I should spend a few more bucks and get something better.


http://amzn.com/B003A6H27K

u/andsbar · 1 pointr/canon

Edit: nevermind, now I see it is for full frame.

was looking for a more versatile lens to travel, as my 18-135 kitlens was really not sharp or fast enough. I was going to get a Tamron 24-70 f2.8 for around 600 euros. Until Someone suggested a sigma 17-50 f2.8 and I checked it out. Loved it, fast and sharp and versatile! Paid 270 euros. I use it for traveling, landscape and street photography. And use the prime 50 for portraits. Highly recommend it. https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B003A6H27K/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1522534610&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=sigma+17-50mm+f2.8+canon

u/Travv · 1 pointr/photography

What's the deal with lenses from Japan being super cheap on amazon? I'm looking at a $569 lens and it is $360 from Japan. There's a few other sellers as well from there with similarly priced lenses.

u/wanakoworks · 1 pointr/canon

That is precisely the right mentality to have. There are many people out there that lust over gear and they still have trouble with the basics. Keep your head up, keep shooting and you will improve.

I must also say that, personally, I'm biased towards prime lenses (single focal length). They tend to have excellent image quality BUT may not be very flexible. If you are looking for more flexibility (zoom lens) look for a Sigma 17-50mm 2.8. I've heard great things about this lens and will allow you to go wide and a bit narrow. It would be considered a significant upgrade over a kit lens.

New: https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/standard-lenses/17-50mm-f28-ex-dc-os-hsm

Used: https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K

u/fryfrog · 1 pointr/canon

I <3 the 24-70mm f/2.8 on my 5Dm4 so much that I got a [17-55mm f/2.8] (https://smile.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000EW8074) for my 7Dm2. For about half that, there is the [Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8] (https://smile.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-Aperture-Standard-Digital/dp/B003A6H27K). It isn't far outside your budget if you're talking about $150ish lenses and it covers a huge zoom range and you could pass along your 24mm f/2.8.

u/phylouis · 1 pointr/photography

Hi ! My first camera was a canon 70D too ! A great all around camera especially if you are into videography. About what lenses you should get, you should definitely buy the nifty fifty, it is just a fantastic lens for its price !
If you are a video enthusiast, you should consider buying the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 which has a great IQ, a nice optical stabilizer and a constant f2.8, video I made with the sigma+70d here.

Or if you can afford a canon lens, the equivalent that is this one.

Anyway, the 70D is probably one of the best camera out there to start. Make sure to read a lot of books about photography, exposure, etc.. And even consider joining /r/photoclass2017/ !

Have a great day !

u/d4vezac · 1 pointr/Nikon

If I was buying a new camera today, I'd get a refurbished body-only D7100 and the Sigma 17-50. I also already have use of a Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC for the time being, though, so I'd be looking to complement that lens. If you wanted a prime, the 35 1.8 can be had for just under $200, or you can look into the 50 1.8D for just over $100, or the 85mm 1.8 for about $400. Pair all 3 together and you have a normal lens and two telephoto options.

Really, though, if your friends have Nikon gear, I'd see what you could work out in terms of borrowing lenses, and maybe even cameras, to try out. If they're protective of their gear, see if you can at least tag along with them the next time they go out to shoot. It'll give you a better idea of what you like shooting and what focal lengths you will need.

Most of the lenses you mentioned have a good bit of telephoto zoom--out to 140, 200, or even 300. Good telephoto zooms aren't cheap, so a variable aperture superzoom like the 55-200 or 70-300 might be all that's in your budget. I've seen the 70-300 VR recommended a bit on here.

u/columbo222 · 1 pointr/photography

Actually the Sigma is not too far out of my budget. Can you tell me why you recommend it among the enormous myriad of options? I found this on Amazon, is this model compatible with the T5i?

Thank you again for the advice, much appreciated!

u/dmpither · 1 pointr/AskPhotography

You can replace the Canon 18-55mm with a refurbished Canon certified STM version for $88, or if you want to upgrade, see Amazon or Ebay for a new or used Sigma 17-55 mm with a Canon mount; new is $297. Either is good, but if you were going to spend money, I'd recommend the Sigma. Once you learn more about photography, you can do more with the Sigma. In the meantime, look on YouTube for macro photography tutorials; you don't usually want to use auto focus in macro so the 18-55mm lens you have is fine for now.

Canon 18-55mm STM, $88 Amazon:
Canon 8114B002 EF-S 18-55mm is STM (Certified Refurbished) https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00L9IRHU8/ref=cm_sw_r_other_apa_i_vfGTCb5KQM9P6

Amazon:
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Zoom Lens for Canon Digital DSLR Camera, $297 new: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_PgGTCbM90G4RG

u/mrwillbill · 1 pointr/photography

I used to own a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 with optical stabilization back when I had a t2i and was very pleased with it. I'd recommend it for a general purpose lens and a good upgrade from the kit. Amazon has used ones as low as $320. This lens is not designed to work with full frame cameras though.

http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-50mm-2-8-Aperture-Canon/dp/B003A6H27K/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1420669004&sr=8-3&keywords=17+50+2.8

u/James_C_Corn · 1 pointr/photography

Are you talking about This lens? It seems like something I would be interested in, how is buying lenses used? There are a few in the low mid 300 range that are listed as "Like New" that I could consider picking up.

u/hammad22 · 1 pointr/photography

Which zoom lenses would be best for night time street photography? I have a D3300 with 35mm prime which has been doing really good so far, but I'm thinking to replace it (although replacing a prime for a zoom for low light photos is a downgrade) with zoom lenses for the versatility because I've been increasingly needing zoom for the event photography I take at school. I've looked at the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8, and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I want to keep it under $600 in terms of cost, but yeah, if I were to replace my 35mm prime for zoom, which zoom would be the best for nighttime street photos?

u/kake14 · 1 pointr/canon

Maybe the 55-250mm STM if you want to go longer? It's got IS and is a good buy from what I've seen. Otherwise you could look at the 17-50 2.8 from Sigma. It's getting more expensive, but if you like the focal length of your kit lens it's basically a better version of it. Lets in 4 times more light at 50mm than the kit lens and has IS also.

u/coldcoffeecup · 1 pointr/photography

I just purchased a new lens, and I realize I have no real appreciative knowledge about lens filters. All I really know is that I have an inclination that it will protect the lens itself from damage. I usually shoot landscape (nature, parks), or nighttime (milkyway, stars). Is a lens filter like this one cheaping out? It seems to have positive reviews, but I thought I'd ask you all! I would like to protect the lens, but I don't want to degrade the quality of the lens. Thanks!

u/gluon_du_cul · 1 pointr/france

Ca dépend des modèles. Certains Sigma valent largement les Canon, pour un prix souvent plus bas. Il y a des tests très poussés sur les sites dédiés a la photo (focus-numerique.com, bhphotovideo.com, dpreview.com, etc...) où tu pourras retrouver des comparaisons Canon vs Sigma vs Tamron.

Le Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 EX OS HSM ou le [SIGMA 17-70MM F/2.8-4 DC OS HSM CONTEMPORARY] (https://www.amazon.fr/Sigma-Objectif-17-70-Macro-Contemporary/dp/B00AXZYY86/ref=sr_1_3?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1500471685&sr=1-3&keywords=sigma+canon) sont de bons objectifs, bien moins cher que le Canon 17-55 f/2.8.
J'ai commencé avec un Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 et je possède maintenant le Canon. La qualité est un peu meilleur certes, mais je ne trouve pas que ca justifie les 300 euros de plus et je recommande le Sigma sans problème. Pour photographier des animaux il faut souvent garder une distance et/ou pouvoir zoomer, et là, pas de miracles il faudra un objectif qui aille jusqu’à 300mm. J'avais un canon premier prix sans stabilisateur qui etait pas fou, là j'ai un Tamron 70-300 avec stabilisateur (env. 350euro) et ca fait le taf.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/photography

I've been looking into neutral density filters so I can take long exposure shots during the day.

What are some good brands people would recommend?

Also, I asked a question yesterday about an upgrade for the 18-55mm f3.5 - 5.6 kit lens and was recommended two lenses.

This one and this one

Is there really a $460 difference between the two? I know lenses are more of a long term investment. I'm just wondering.

u/gh5046 · 1 pointr/photography

> Do they make 1.8 EF-S?

The mount on the lens, EF or EF-S, isn't what applies the crop factor. It's the sensor on your body. Unless you have a full frame body, like the 5D, the 50mm f/1.8 lens will have a smaller field of view.

There are other prime lenses (fixed focal length lens) you can look at (scroll down to the 'Wide-Angle' section) if you want something wider.

If you want a zoom lens check out these lenses if you'd like to supplant your kit lens: the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens or the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 or the Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8. (Disclaimer: I have not used any of these three lenses and cannot attest to their quaility)

u/dasazz · 1 pointr/photography

Why not get the Sigma 17-50/2.8 instead for £260 or even cheaper used?

u/doubledipset · 0 pointsr/Psychonaut

Ha totally! I'm probably as full of myself as much as I hate myself. But let me give you the rundown and go in detail:

First - I saw the caption. I stand by what I said about it. Language, man, it's nuanced and important. At first I was certain the piece wasn't yours, especially because it's pretty good.

So - I reverse-imaged your artwork. I glanced through a bunch of deleted reddit threads without any leads until I saw the booty blog. OH SNAP! It's ON now, bitch (was the mentality that motivated me). I went back to the threads, saw the accusations of you being racist, and really flipped my shit. That's the kind of hypocrisy that goes far deeper than race or prejudice. I had to really hit home and hit deep with what I say.

My fury was fierce yet the trail was running cold... At this point all I know is the blog I saw, the post in /r/blackladies, your initials and that you moved to Tampa... Until I saw your web links in the lower left corner of your piece. Again, man - language! The art of? /u/comradepyro said it best - > Bit of an ego there, mate. Anyway, that's how I see your portfolio, CV, etc. It was kind of a thrill, I've never felt like a private eye before! I'm also shocked at how much I found out... Please take this as a wake up call on online privacy! I'm actually a bit freaked out. I've never just "Googled" someone so extensively. Be really careful with any bits of info. I can PM you the details of what else I found if you want.

/u/HarlequinForestFairy said that I "hate you so much" - you pissed me off; there's a difference. And you continue to do it! The way you use language is political - not in terms of Republican/Democrat but in the context of Slavoj Zizek's Violence. I generally agree with you but I'm irritated by the way you say it.

> A person does not truly value their humanity until they experience it being taken away from them.

Totally. Please read Violence though and think about the word "humanity". Selfishness - yeah. By the way, did you know that our species can be traced back to the first hominoid that did not abandon its sick and elderly? Suffering - mmmhhmmm. Kafka, Nietzsche, Van Gogh, so on and so on. Suffering is an odd thing for sure. Is David Foster Wallace less of a writer because his suffering was mental and emotional? See what I mean? "Dehumanization" is one bitch of a word.

I've had a pretty comfortable life. Off the top of my head, I probably experienced 5 "tragedies" (more like first-world problems).

  1. A dog I used to play with attacked a stray cat and her newborn litter when I was 6 yo. I grabbed a stick and started hitting the dog but at the same time I didn't want to hurt him. He just ignored me and kept snapping the kitten's necks. The and ambiguous morality was devastating.

  2. I became aware of myself within my body and began resenting my parents for giving me the pain of consciousness.

  3. My grandfather died.

  4. I read about subjective vs. objective.

  5. I saw that many of my classmates were content within the "Theater" and that our paths would go different ways.

    Lol. Boohoo. I'm a lucky fuck but the sad lil' ENFP within doesn't appreciate it enough and likes to bitch instead. But you sort of proved my point right there and then...

    TL;DR: I'm not hating on your art so don't feel the need to defend it. I'm criticizing your self-importance.

    Anyway,

    Good luck.

  • Mid-cheap: Canon 60D - I have the cheaper version of this one. The skin tones are really good and the colors are robust. If you have any moving shots, you need the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS. It's the one I have and it's amazing at 24mm and up. You need a constant F# for video, otherwise the aperture (and exposure) will change if you zoom in low light. If it's mostly steady shots and indoors, get the new 24mm f2.8 STM. If that's too expensive, get this Pentax SMC 50mm 1.7 and a Fotodiox Pentax-K to EOS adapter (I've got this one too, I love it, but direct sunlight will give you lots of flare). And you can always pick up a kit lens used from eBay or KEH.com for shits and giggles.


  • Cheapest: Sony NEX-3N THIS IS SO CHEAP! WTF?? Old but great camera. You can get reaaally nice and cheap Canon FD glass for it and an FD to MFT adapter. Only look at primes - 24mm or 28mm / 50mm / 135mm @ f2.8 or lower. You can also get a Metabones SpeedBooster later on. Heads up: The smaller the camera sensor, the "bigger" it makes each lens. The Canon 60D has an APS-C sensor with a 1.6x crop factor which makes a 28mm roughly 45mm. The Micro-Four/Thirds have an even smaller one that varies between 2x and 3x. I think the NEX-3n is 3x.


  • Baller 4K: Panasonic GH4 I know nothing about this camera except that everyone's crazy about it.