Hi! my name is Isaac. Im really new to photography (started the beginning of this year). I want to purchase a new lens for my Canon r50(I have the 18-45mm and the 50mm 1.8), but Im stuck between 2. On one had the 55-210mm only goes to f/5. Meanwhile the 18-150mm goes to f/3.5.
If I plan on trying all types of photography in order to see which one I want to invest more time into, which lens will benefit me most? (I find myself wanting more zoom than 50mm)
Is there any other lens in the $100-$400 price range that I should look at?
Also, any other general beginner photographer advice would be appreciated.
Hard to beat the RF-S 18-150: petite, sharp and large zoom range. If you get it, you'll probably never use your 18-45 again. I've not owned the RF-S 55-210 but it has developed a reputation of being mediocre. I'd rather save up and buy the RF 70-200 4L and/or RF 100-400—both are are excellent and oft used on my R7.
I bought the R10 as a crop-sensor companion to my R6m2 and it came with the RF 18-45. I replaced it with the RF 18-150 and have never used the 18-45 since. The 18-150 is so small and lightweight but it has such a useful focal range, and it's a decent performer. It has become my standard lens for my R10, although I use the RF 100-400 on it quite a bit...those two also make a great lightweight comb. That's another lens you might consider adding. I've not used the 55-200 so I can't give an opinion on it.
If you want to be able to use such a wide focal length range lens instead of tThe lenses your already have, the coverage of the 18-150 will be useful in a wider range of situations, since it goes from wide to telephoto.
On the other hand, if you are looking for a lens to augment and extend what you can do with your existing lenses and you are looking for more reach the 55-210 has less overlap and is longer.
In general, it is good to remember that lens recommendations are best made in the context of intended use — not the absolute quality of the lens in a vacuum.
One more bit of beginner advice: Go slow on lens/gear acquisition. while the new gear is exciting, try to make your focus mostly on photographs — what makes them work, what you like about them, trying to see the way that the photographers you like see. And have fun.
eye_see_stuff_ wrote:
Hi! my name is Isaac. Im really new to photography (started the beginning of this year). I want to purchase a new lens for my Canon r50(I have the 18-45mm and the 50mm 1.8), but Im stuck between 2. On one had the 55-210mm only goes to f/5. Meanwhile the 18-150mm goes to f/3.5.
If I plan on trying all types of photography in order to see which one I want to invest more time into, which lens will benefit me most? (I find myself wanting more zoom than 50mm)
Is there any other lens in the $100-$400 price range that I should look at?
Also, any other general beginner photographer advice would be appreciated. ...Show more →
The big difference is the focal length. 18nm is wide, even 55mm is a short telephoto. So it depends on if you are interested in wide or tele, getting everything in vs getting close to the subject. Good to have both, though
As far as beginner advice, it is difficult to know where to start!!! Photograph light not objects isn't a bad place to start, feel free to ask questions!
I like the 55-250's, debatable the version, excellent zoom macro imo, I've used 2 different versions, should be able to adapt EF amd EF-s lenses. 55 is still tele though so you'd ideally need the 18-45 or inexpensive 18-55. Downloading Digital Photo professional (still off the Canon site?) and learning RAW a bit is a good idea at some point, but maybe not yet lens corrections a good idea on the 18-45 I'd bet though
Another vote for the 18-150 from me. I own both that one and the EF-M 55-200 which is very similar to the RF-S 55-210.
As has been said, the 18-150 has a great range in a very small package and with decent performance. It also has another virtue that is important when you want to explore different types of photography, and that is the ability to focus close and fill the frame with small subjects like flowers or small details. The 55-210 is not as good at that. I also feel that the deifference between 150 mm and 210 mm is not enough to sacrifice the conveneince of not needing to switch back an forth to the 18-45.
The 55-210 has a reputation of being a mediocre lens, but it is not a bad lens. It is just that it did not fill the expectations after we had the EF-S 55-250 IS STM, another lens worth considering (it is important that it is the STM variant). The 55-200/210 did not have the same range, and on top of that, the image quality was not as good at the long end. Since many buy such a lens for using it mostly at the longest focal length, it loses much of its attraction. The strength of the 55-210 is that the image quality from 55 to 135 mm is as good as any other in its class, sometimes even better, and it is extremely small for a lens that goes to 210 mm after all.
My photo tip of the day would be, get closer! Getting closer usually makes more interesting and catching images that standing at a distance and zooming in. Not without exceptions of course.
I'd recommend the 18-150, because it's both an upgrade over the 18-45 and a decent replacement for the 55-210 except at the long end.
I got the 18-150 in a kit with my R7, intended on replacing it nearly immediately, but have been impressed by the 18-150's to the point where it's pretty much welded on my R7 (I have the R6 as well, which gets my other glass for the most part).
