Which Next Lens

R

rabaroo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
324
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

I've just started in the world of photography and bought an EOS 450D with 18-55mm lens....

I am now looking forwards to my next lens (:thinking: expensive hobby) and just want a bit of advice really....

What I want to picture is, well anything really.... I am an overenthusiastic holiday snapper by nature, so I like doing landscapes and tourist sights and that kinda stuff, but I'd also like to be able to take quality portrait pictures and the like....

my current thoughts are:
-existing lens doesnt give me the zoom capability I'd like - so I need a zoom lens
- the max aperture of the existing lens is 3.5 and doesnt do enough to throw background out of focus for portraits...

SO I am looking to get one new lens initially, probably a zoom one, and have looked at a few ranging from 18-200, 28-200, 55-250 and 75-300....

my thought being if i bought an 18-200 then it replaces my current lens, which is good in terms of not having to change lenses over, but am i paying fo the same thing twice for example?, so should i go for a 55-250 and pick up from where my existing lens left off - giving me a good range from wide to zoom lenses.....

I am also unsure about the Canon vs 3rd party lenses, though I was given strong advice by my friend to stick to canon....

any thoughts, opinions or guides appreciated at this stage :clap:
 
rabaroo said:
Hi

I've just started in the world of photography and bought an EOS 450D with 18-55mm lens....

I am now looking forwards to my next lens (:thinking: expensive hobby) and just want a bit of advice really....

What I want to picture is, well anything really.... I am an overenthusiastic holiday snapper by nature, so I like doing landscapes and tourist sights and that kinda stuff, but I'd also like to be able to take quality portrait pictures and the like....

my current thoughts are:
-existing lens doesnt give me the zoom capability I'd like - so I need a zoom lens
- the max aperture of the existing lens is 3.5 and doesnt do enough to throw background out of focus for portraits...

SO I am looking to get one new lens initially, probably a zoom one, and have looked at a few ranging from 18-200, 28-200, 55-250 and 75-300....

my thought being if i bought an 18-200 then it replaces my current lens, which is good in terms of not having to change lenses over, but am i paying fo the same thing twice for example?, so should i go for a 55-250 and pick up from where my existing lens left off - giving me a good range from wide to zoom lenses.....

I am also unsure about the Canon vs 3rd party lenses, though I was given strong advice by my friend to stick to canon....

any thoughts, opinions or guides appreciated at this stage :clap:
Click to expand...

Welcome to the forum! :woot: We're by and large a friendly bunch and TPs claim that it's the friendliest 'tography forum there is is largely accurate. Been hiccups of late but they seem to have been ironed out :clap:

Something like an 18-200 will cover pretty much what you want it for. Only problem being that with the extreme rang it covers, IQ is often compromised.

Don't get me wrong, it's not dire, just a master at nothing. The main advantage is that you won't have to keep swapping lenses, which should help keep your sensor relatively dirt free!

As for maximum aperture, to really throw the background out of focus, you're realistically looking at a maximum aperture of 2.8, but often with these zoom lenses you mentioned, at the zoom end ie. 200mm end, you will get something like 5.6 or 6.3. Maximum aperture (MA)really goes beyond throwing the background out of focus though....the lower number the MA is the more light the lens lets in to the cameras sensor, so therefore the fastest shutter speeds are possible (for freezing movement) without increasing the camera's sensitivity to light (ISO). A high ISO means grainy images, so the image quality (IQ) won't be as good...

At the kind of range you're looking at, you get what you pay for unfortunately, so realistically you're looking at the bottom end of the 'L' range of Canon glass before real quality starts to show.

As for sticking to Canon, IMHO that's sound advice, if you really can.

Hope this helps :thumbs:
 
Firstly welcome to the forum :)
The people are a great bunch and the advice given is really good.
Anyway back to your lens...
When I bought my 450D with the kit lens I also took the optional bundle that also includes a Tamron 70-300mm lens.
For me personally, I find it a pain as I tend to suffer from camera shake when using the Tamron.
Obviously on a tripod it is fine.
I really wanted a longer focal length lens I could use when walking about without the camera shake I suffer from.
I've recently purchased the Canon EF-S50mm-250mm lens and I love it.
It's lighter than the Tamron and the IS system sorts out the camera shake.

With regard to the backround issue you have mentioned with the kit lens when taking portaits, have you tried the camera in AV mode?
I would also play with the metering settings because I have achieved what you want to do by doing this in AV mode.
 
I would say, first off the 50mm f/1.8 at about £55 - it's cracking :thumbs:

If you want the reach of a zoom, how about the 70-200mm f4L. Can be had for about £400. Background blur is dependent on focal length and relative distance to subject/background as well as the apperature, here is a shot at 105mm f4 for example: http://sittingbourneSPAMerver.com/downloads/Photos/TP_Shared/IMG_1317_edited-2.jpg
 
One thing to note which Hashcake has reminded me, is say at 200mm you can only get f/5.6, you'd get a reasonably out of focus background, but it won't be completely out of focus...presumably this is what you meant, having referred to the max apertures, which no doubt you've found...

The only way to get a more out of focus background is by using something like an f/2.8 lens.

However, another important thing to remember to maximise out of focus backgrounds is to make sure your subject is not amongst the background by in front/to the side of etc, then it will "pop" out from the background a little more. The background will then show that it is behind it a little...

EDIT: beaten to it about subject/background
 
If you are on a budget then the 55-200EFS IS is a good lens.

The 70-300USM IS has a little more reach, about the same optical quality, but leaves you a gap (you'll probably not notice) 55-70mm.

If you have the wonga and want to go for quality then the 70-200 f4 L IS is waaaay out in front.
(or you could get the f2.8 one [I did] and large arm muscles)
 
my friend has the 50-250 and i was shocked by it actually, some of the pic he has taken using that lens have got so much barrel distirtion in them. one of them has managed to straiten up the leaning tower of pizza :lol:
 
pearce_jj said:
I would say, first off the 50mm f/1.8 at about £55 - it's cracking :thumbs:[/url]
Click to expand...

:agree:

It's great little lens that a lot of people here (including me) also own and recommend.
I use mine quite often for portraits.
 
Another fact is that the better quality lenses (like the 'L' range), do make the background more out of focus (OOF) at the same aperture value. This may be due to the quality of glass, material ie. many 'L' lenses use flourite coating to increase the OOF effect..
 
DeadlySmurf said:
one of them has managed to straiten up the leaning tower of pizza :lol:
Click to expand...

Lol, he should be congratulated.
He's solved a problem structual engineers have been trying to solve for years :D
 
markta said:
Another fact is that the better quality lenses (like the 'L' range), do make the background more out of focus (OOF) at the same aperture value. This may be due to the quality of glass, material ie. many 'L' lenses use flourite coating to increase the OOF effect..
Click to expand...

I can't find any smiles to replace the following words.
'L glass' drool drool drool drool :)
Seriously though, I know a couple of people who have invested in L glass to use on their budget DSLR's (400D & 450D) and I have been extemley impressed with the difference in quality of their pictures.
 
I'm going to be a little different and say deffinately get the nifty fifty it's fantastic for the money and will let you get that shallow DOF you seek then I'd point you at ebay and a second hand canon 70-210 either the F4 or the slightly newer USM f3.5-4.5 both of which can be had for less than £100 giving your hobby a great kick start for very little expenditure you can then sell these lenses for the same money down the line should you get the bug and want to buy L glass. You will loose money if you buy a brand new budget 70-300 as you will inevitably want to upgrade it.
 
whats a nifty fifty?

if you can show me these gread deal 2nd hand lenses it'd be good to see as i've not seen anything really that sticks out at me so far..... and as you say i dont want to buy something cr~p....
 
Nift fifty is the canon 50mm f1.8 which is a bargin brand new at around £60 from our good friend Kerso or from other ebay sellers such as http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BRAND-NEW-CAN...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1308&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14

the other lenses I refer to can be found here

Canon 70-210 F4 (Usual go for around £80-£90 can be had for as little as £60)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-EOS-Zoo...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
Ken Rockwell review - http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-210mm.htm

Canon 70-210mm USM F3.5-4.5 (Normally fetch around a £100)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CANON-EOS-70-...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
I've never found a good review but optically it's very similar to the lens above but has the advantage of USM for faster quieter focussing.

Neither of these lenses is going to be as good as getting a 70-200f4l but they are still very good I would prefer them to a cheap modern zoom and much much much cheaper leaving you money for other goodies like filters and bags.
 
rabaroo said:
Hi

I've just started in the world of photography and bought an EOS 450D with 18-55mm lens....

I am now looking forwards to my next lens (:thinking: expensive hobby) and just want a bit of advice really....

What I want to picture is, well anything really.... I am an overenthusiastic holiday snapper by nature, so I like doing landscapes and tourist sights and that kinda stuff, but I'd also like to be able to take quality portrait pictures and the like....

my current thoughts are:
-existing lens doesnt give me the zoom capability I'd like - so I need a zoom lens
- the max aperture of the existing lens is 3.5 and doesnt do enough to throw background out of focus for portraits...

SO I am looking to get one new lens initially, probably a zoom one, and have looked at a few ranging from 18-200, 28-200, 55-250 and 75-300....

my thought being if i bought an 18-200 then it replaces my current lens, which is good in terms of not having to change lenses over, but am i paying fo the same thing twice for example?, so should i go for a 55-250 and pick up from where my existing lens left off - giving me a good range from wide to zoom lenses.....

I am also unsure about the Canon vs 3rd party lenses, though I was given strong advice by my friend to stick to canon....

any thoughts, opinions or guides appreciated at this stage :clap:
Click to expand...

I'd agree with the others- a nifty fifty (50mm f/1.8) is a great portrait lens.

In terms of telephoto, I have a 55-250mm IS to go on my 450D. It's a very good hook-up, and I'm extremely impressed with image quality. It's about £160 too if you go to the right places.

I took these with it:

img2004yr1.jpg



img1991br3.jpg


Hope that helps somewhat :D
 
I suppose it really depends what your budget is. I took the plunge (and the advice of a local pro) and bought the sigma 18-200 IS lens. Very, very pleased with it. The IQ was much better than the kit lens that came with my 400d, and having the large zoom range means it hardly ever comes off my camera (apart from portraits with the nifty-fifty!). That way I spend far more time taking photos, rather than constantly changing lenses.

I found that when on a day out with the missus I'd miss out on shots because I didn't have the time / inclination to be fiddling about with different lens, so I wouldn't bother taking the shot. As a (still very) amateur I think this needs to be considered.

Plus the Image Stabilisation means that you can handhold more shots at the longer end of the zoom. With the sensor magnification I don't think you need much more that 200mm unless you're doing something specialist (sports / nature) in which case you'll probably end up spending a lot of money!

Just my two penneth worth.

Starabo
--
 
I can certainly vouch for the quality of the older style lenses (re 70-210mm mentioned above) as I have the 135mm F2.8, from the original EOS line-up, which is great and was cheap.
 
I bought the Canon 50-250mm IS lens. It has hardly come off my camera since. I have found it to be VERY versatile. It is a great walkaround lens and I've also managed to do some OK close ups. I often use it racked up to its maximum 250mm focal length and have noticed no problems at all.

I say 50-250mm IS all the way - Truely fab - IMHO!!
 
Hi i went for the Sigma 18-125mm OS HSM this is a fab lens and sharp as well,this could replace your 18-55mm sell it and put to for a more versatile one Image stabilization (canon) or optical stabilization (Sigma) work well at full zoom, if you drop the IS OS you can save a few quid, or a buy a mon-o-pod to hold steady at full zoom, i use IS and OS it makes life so much easier, if a quick pic is needed with out the mon-o-pod, but for the 100-400mm it helps a lot.

Regards Mark.
 
It seems to me that you have several different requirements.
The 18-55IS that you have is a zoom lens and takes very good pictures.
If that isn't wide enough for landscapes then you're looking at buying a wide angle lens maybe 10-22 which isn't cheap.
For portraits you really need a prime (non zoom) lens with an aperture of f2.8 at least and a focal length around 60-100 on a crop body.
If you buy a large range zoom (18-200) then as was pointed out in a previous post the lens design has to be a compromise and will not give the quality at either end of the range and certainly will not give the large aperture that you seek.
There is no magic solution to the problem.
Some TOGs go for a range of primes for the Image quality, some TOGs go for reduced range zooms (usually L's) to cover the focal length of interest.
Have you considered renting lenses of interest before you commit to a purchase?
 
a1ex2001 said:
the other lenses I refer to can be found here

Canon 70-210 F4 (Usual go for around £80-£90 can be had for as little as £60)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Canon-EOS-Zoo...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
Ken Rockwell review - http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/70-210mm.htm

Canon 70-210mm USM F3.5-4.5 (Normally fetch around a £100)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/CANON-EOS-70-...39:1|66:2|65:12|240:1318&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
I've never found a good review but optically it's very similar to the lens above but has the advantage of USM for faster quieter focussing.

Neither of these lenses is going to be as good as getting a 70-200f4l but they are still very good I would prefer them to a cheap modern zoom and much much much cheaper leaving you money for other goodies like filters and bags.
Click to expand...

OK I've got the opportunity to buy an old 70-210mm F4 lens, but I'd set myself up to buy the 55-250MM IS.... so which do I go for??? :thinking: - given the range of uses I want to put it to I have concluded myself that the 55-250 with its IS will be more flexible to me, preventing the reliance on using a tripod for zoom shots!?? - i've also read that the push/pull on the 70-210mm is a bit of a pain when pointing up or down?
 
OR.......

I've got an option to buy a deal on:

Sigma 28-70mm (f2.8-f4) DG AF
Sigma 70-300mm (f4-f5.6) DG Macro

for less than the cost of the 55-250mm

Would this give me more? - arguably replace my 18-55 canon kit lens with the "better" 28-70 (better as its f2.8?) and then give me the 70-300 instead of the 55-250mm lens... the only issue being lack of IS???

gettin confused now!!!

Help :help:
 
rabaroo said:
OK I've got the opportunity to buy an old 70-210mm F4 lens, but I'd set myself up to buy the 55-250MM IS.... so which do I go for??? :thinking: - given the range of uses I want to put it to I have concluded myself that the 55-250 with its IS will be more flexible to me, preventing the reliance on using a tripod for zoom shots!?? - i've also read that the push/pull on the 70-210mm is a bit of a pain when pointing up or down?
Click to expand...

The tripod thing is a bit of an exageration plenty of people on here get great result handheld with 200mm f4 lenses, takes a bit of practice but is perfectly achievable. I've never found the push pull zoom an issue took a bit of getting used too but it's very easy once you get the hang of it and the zoom creep on the two examples i've used was no worse than on my sigma 17-70 yes if i bounce them around alot they creep but in normal use it's not been a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top