Lens advice - Canon 550D

[undesign]

Apologies. It's the inevitable question after buying your first DSLR.

I've done some serious reading on the various options, but would like some general feedback from your own experience. I'm looking for a zoom lens.

I currently have -

1) 18-55 kit lens
2) 50 1.8

I was thinking of going for the 55-250 (kind of made up my mind vs the 70-300), but then started looking at something like a 18-200 or 28-200 for more versatility. I see a Tamron lens 17-270 also.

From what I've read the IQ on the 18-55 + 55-250 combo maybe slightly better, but then again the convenience of have wide and zoom on one lens is a big plus, especially as a "walk around lens". Or, I imagine, on vacations.

Any thoughts/advice/experience on this? Thanks!

 

[bwana]

I think my second lens after the 50mm was a sigma 28-300 which I still use from time to time. Not a perfect lens but fantastic as a walkabout.

I'm not sure what your budget is like but to me the 24-70 and 70-200 is the quintessential combo.

 

[undesign]

I think my second lens after the 50mm was a sigma 28-300 which I still use from time to time. Not a perfect lens but fantastic as a walkabout.

I'm not sure what your budget is like but to me the 24-70 and 70-200 is the quintessential combo.

I wanted to add that you're not allowed to say the 70-200 L. Too expensive atm.

The 28-300 looks interesting. Had a quick Google, but seems to be non-IS. Would prefer IS though.

Budget-wise I'd like to stay under the R5-6k mark for now. And I'm not fussed about EF vs EF-S lenses. The 55-250 seems to be a great option for me - just wondering about the practicality with regards to everyday shooting. Zoom on, zoom off...

 

[bwana]

I wanted to add that you're not allowed to say the 70-200 L. Too expensive atm.

I didnt say they had to be canon. Personally I think the Sigma 24-70 is better than the Canon version.

I haven't heard much in the way of positive remarks about the 55-250. Maybe a second hand 70-300?

EDIT - even a new 70-300 falls in your price range.

 

[SubliminalThought]

My advice is to find your shooting style first before spending on lenses that does not suite you. My shooting style for general walkabouts is from +- 35mm - 100mm. So I got really pissed having to change lenses everytime I need more length (had the 18-55) . But if you generally shoot up close, then perhaps the 55-250 would be ok for you.

If you are looking at a beginners combo - you could look at a 28-135mm + 70-300mm Combo, but you are left wanting on the wide end. There is also the 17-85 as well which isn't much up on the new entry level lenses. Those are some options. Of course, if you feel that you want an all in one zoom then you can look at the 18-200s that are available. But first, decide if you want to go for a two lens combo or one zoom.

 

[BigAl-sa]

For a walkaround lens have a look at Sigma's 18-125 - better quality than the current 18-2xy offerings from all manufacturers out there.

 

[bwana]

For a walkaround lens have a look at Sigma's 18-125 - better quality than the current 18-2xy offerings from all manufacturers out there.

Almost had me wanting one until . . . "For use with smaller chip APS-c & 4/3 cameras only"

 

[BigAl-sa]

Almost had me wanting one until . . . "For use with smaller chip APS-c & 4/3 cameras only"

It will work on your 7d and your 400ds

Come to think of it, it will work on your 1d3, just dunno how much vignetting you'll get.

 

[bwana]

It will work on your 7d and your 400ds

Come to think of it, it will work on your 1d3, just dunno how much vignetting you'll get.

It might work but after spending an evening in the pouring rain I'm going to lean more towards weather resistant lenses from now on.

 

[undesign]

I didnt say they had to be canon. Personally I think the Sigma 24-70 is better than the Canon version.

I haven't heard much in the way of positive remarks about the 55-250. Maybe a second hand 70-300?

EDIT - even a new 70-300 falls in your price range.

After reading a lot of reviews/forum it seems that the 55-250 is a very good lens for the price. (Speaking as a non-pro of course ) Maybe slightly worse in IQ than the 70-300, but pretty good none the less. If I save enough I can maybe buy another lens as well.

My advice is to find your shooting style first before spending on lenses that does not suite you. My shooting style for general walkabouts is from +- 35mm - 100mm. So I got really pissed having to change lenses everytime I need more length (had the 18-55) . But if you generally shoot up close, then perhaps the 55-250 would be ok for you.

If you are looking at a beginners combo - you could look at a 28-135mm + 70-300mm Combo, but you are left wanting on the wide end. There is also the 17-85 as well which isn't much up on the new entry level lenses. Those are some options. Of course, if you feel that you want an all in one zoom then you can look at the 18-200s that are available. But first, decide if you want to go for a two lens combo or one zoom.

Choices, choices. Maybe you're right, I should be a bit more patient. But I know I'll want/need and decent zoom lens - question is just, as you said, do I want to switch the whole time or not.

28-135 could work, with a decent zoom later on for the occasions where you know you'll need the extra zoom. But yes, the 28mm probably isn't wide enough, especially with the crop sensor.

For a walkaround lens have a look at Sigma's 18-125 - better quality than the current 18-2xy offerings from all manufacturers out there.

This could be a good alternative to the 28-135. The option of covering relatively wide to a medium zoom as the "default" lens is starting to appeal to me. Later on I'll look for a big zoom lens to complement.

I'm really enjoying the 50 1.8 prime, but with the crop sensor it's really in your face close. Wouldn't mind a wider prime...

Thanks for the advice guys - the decision is more complicated that the original camera purchase.

How many of you shoot with a 18-125 or 28-135 type lens?