Hi - Just upgraded my wifes camera from a pure point and shoot to a Xsi camera with an 18-50 kit lense. She has been a camera fanatic for the last few years, we have about 30K p;ics on our computer!
She wants a longer zoom lens now. I have $2-300 budgeted for a lens. Am I wasting money buying the 55-250 $180 zoom? I would rather have an 18-1?? lens so it doesn't need to be changed too often if anyone has any ideas.
I keep watching the buy-sell forum, but haven't jumped on anything yet.
I am posting because she just called complaining I haven't bought one yet! She is a special ed teachers aid and the kids are skating today, but she can't get close enough for good pictures!
Need some advice, I don't want to waste money on something too cheap but I do want something.
For approximately $350 or so, you can get a 70-300mm IS, which is a great lens for the money. Make sure that it is the IS version though but not the L lens
If you can, I would suggest saving up and getting higher quality lenses given that your wife has already demonstrated dedication to hobby with 30k photos. Dont just look at pure cost, but value. In your shoes if my finances allowed, I would be looking at a 70-300IS Or a 70-200 F4 Non IS. Good Luck.
AGeoJO wrote:
For approximately $350 or so, you can get a 70-300mm IS, which is a great lens for the money. Make sure that it is the IS version though but not the L lens
I was going to suggest the same. But if you prefer to stay within the original budget, the 55-250 will not disappoint you either.
Roger’s take This is a well built lens with a nice range. My initial shoot shows that its very similar in image quality to the Sigma 18-200 OS with an excellent vibration control system. Is it L-quality sharpness? No, of course not, it is a compromise lens. But its quite good and provides images that make great 5×7 prints and decent 8×10s. Plus, you have a one-lens solution that gets reasonably wide and very long with an image stabilization system that allows you to hand hold the telephoto end. It doesn’t have a wide enough aperture to do ‘stop motion’ sports photography, but it is small enough to pass through security at those sporting venues that won’t allow ‘professional’ lenses in the stands.
In choosing between the Sigma 18-200, Canon 18-200 and the Tamron 28-300, I think it simply comes down to which range you prefer: the fairly wide angle that the Sigma and Canon provide or the extra telephoto range of the Tammy.
Usually,
-75% of her pictures are indoors of our granddaughter
-No real high speed long distance shots
Would the low end quality of the 18-200 be equivalent to the 18-50 lens she currently has?
28-135 is a good lens, it came with my 40D. It is a walk around lens. The telephoto is good for around the yard or near distance photos in a playground. Since the Xsi is a crop camera, (1.6) the 28mm will be a bit long for indoor use when you try to capture several people in a room indoors, but OK for a granddaughter holding a birthday cake. (Set your 18-55 on 28 mm and you will see the composition available.) The zoom telephoto to 135 is a good range for the backyard.
Dan, the best bang for the buck is the latest set of 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS lenses for her rebel. I would just get her both of these used and be done with it - they provide great IQ and they are dirt cheap.
The next step up would be Tamron 17-50 2.8 which is a great lens but it's more money. I would not suggest the 28-135 or the 18-2XX lenses.
Doing some internet shopping - does anyone know it looks like Walmart has the 55-250 lens cheaper than anywhere else - do they really have the same lens as camera stores are selling? I hate to buy anything there!
Thank you everybody for the help and advice.
I decided to purchase both a used 28-135 is um and a new 55-250 and let my wife try them out to see which one she likes better.
If she doesn't like the 135 a friend of mine said he would take it from me and the 250 I can return to Wallyworld for 30 days!
Thanks again for the help, great forum!
dansmail26 wrote:
...I decided to purchase both a used 28-135 is um and a new 55-250 and let my wife try them out to see which one she likes better.
As a one-lens-most-of-the-time lens, I like the 28-135 better. The short end at 28mm works better for me than 55mm. When I know I'll be shooting mostly long shots, then I'll mount the 55-250, but otherwise the 28-135 is a great "walk-around" lens doing most things better.
Another advantage of the 28-135: the Ring USM focus motor is fast and quiet, and because it sends distance information to the camera, flash exposures often seem to be more accurate.
Finally, because the 28-135 is designed for use on full-frame bodies, when used on my cropped-sensor bodies I feel like I'm getting sharper images from corner to corner, and less vignetting.
Indoors my 17-55 gets the most use, because of the wider short end and the faster aperture, but since getting the 28-135 I've been using the 17-55 less and less.
