OK - so my wife is going to buy a new lens for her camera on Tues...... and we need some help

She has a rebel SLR. we have two lenses - both from the rebel 35mm. One is a large zoom lens that we do not use much and the other is the stock lens from the 35mm.

She wants a really good everyday lens - something we can take a variety of shots with.

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance

 

What type of lens is the stock lens?
You're not giving much info - what are the details of the lenses you have now? What are you looking for in this everyday lens? What specific model of Rebel does she have? Does it take EF & EF-S lenses? Are you looking for an IS lens? AF?

 

If you want a really good everyday lens, EF-S 17-55 2.8IS, it's about $800-$900, if purchased online.

 

Rebels take both EF and EF-S lens.

 

good everyday lens? 18-200 and call it a day.

 

lcrazyaznl might beg to disagree...
https://acurazine.com/forums/cameras-photography-44/visit-nyc-701749/

 

Budget?

 

really good

 

+1 for the 17-55 2.8IS

It's a great lens for the money.

 

18-200 is a great lens but i hate it for nyc since traveling in the subway and lens creep is a bit of a pain.

Its good when you have light, vr helps as well not so good when theres no light you have to kick up the iso too much.
i have the nikon one but my friend who has the canon 40d they look identical.

 

tamron 17-50 f/2.8 if you're looking for a cheaper alternative ??

 

The NIKON 18-200 is pretty good, the CANON 18-200 I haven't heard to much GOOD about it.

 

Thats what i wasn't sure about either, physically it looked like canon copied nikons lens lol... well im sure the nikon 1 was built first and the 18-200 canon was recently introduced.

 

my 17-55 lens creeps, so it doesnt bother me, and i thought there was a lock or something for the 18-200?

besides he was asking for an everyday lens.

 

Do you not use the lens because you don't need that kind of range, or it
is just too big?

18-200 is getting pretty decent reviews. It's not great or anything,
but hey, it's 18-200. What lens do you have now, and are you happy with
the zoom range? Do you want something wider? with more zoom?

Only problem with 18-55, is that it doesn't have much zoom.
I think for beginners, zoom is probably the most 'fun' feature, and I think
a mid range zoom would be better. It depends on what you want though.

- Frank

 

Which is weird because they perform very similarly.

And with all the talk about creep, the Canon does have a zoom lock, but the Nikon doesn't. I think it boils down to Nikon getting so much good press these days that everyone assumes they can do no harm. Anything that covers an 11x focal range is going to have issues somewhere along the line. There are just too many design trade-offs that need to be made to cover that range. Both the Canon and Nikon lenses do a good job at balancing those trade-offs and are suitable equivalents for their respective mounts.

I'm surprised nobody has recommended the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM yet.

 

I can only go by what I have heard, I don't own it. It's only what I've read at POTN or FM. But OP asked for REALLY good.

That 28-300mm seems like it's was never made, almost no one ever talks about it.

 

The 18-200 is great outdoor lens not so well if you shoot mainly indoors. (college paper)
not to mention buffalo is kind of gloomy all the time so light kind of stinks.

 

Unfortunately even the best glass can't make Buffalo pretty.

 

I think most people don't feel like carrying a 28mm f/3.5 that weighs 3 pounds...

It's a rare duck, but it actually performs pretty well considering it's insane range.

 

 

tamron 17-50 F/2.8

 

It's a hyper zoom lens. Your tradeoff for having 3 lenses in one is it being slow.

Poor low light performance is not a fault of that lens. It should be obvious from the specs. Now if it had falloff or soft edges, that would be a fault.

 

No i'm not saying its a bad thing, i'm already getting sick of it due to my location and conditions when i shoot for school.

When i shot at manhattan the other day i just wasn't happy carry it around, since the 50mm 1.4 has more light but makes alot shots quiet difficult.

Don't get me wrong i love the lens in the summer, i'm just giving myself an excuse now to get a 17-55 2.8
I bought the 18-200 first
before with my d80 and had a sb800 and 50mm 1.8

Sold the d80 and 50mm 1.8. For a 50mm 1.4 as well as a d300 after i saved up enough.

Then this sept i bought the 70-200 2.8 vr so at this point the 18-200 i hardly use it at the far end since i have the 70-200. So i plan on selling the 18-200 and stick with a 17-55.

 

Thanks for all of the replies. I am sorry that I did not post enough info. I will look tonight and post what we have.....

 

don't hear much about this one either.. I did read it was rather soft though.

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-200mm.../dp/B00004YZLY

 

hmm anyone heard about this?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._XR_Di_II.html

 

oh yeah there's this too - for APS-C

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc..._Di_II_VC.html

 

Nice avatar Rubin!

 

 

Update:

She has a canon rebel XT digital - with a 28/80 lens that came off the 35mm rebel. The other lens is a 70/300 Quantaray. She finds this lens to be difficult to use sometimes - as the camera will not focus the lens. It does have two levels of zoom - once we reach a point, you can move the slide on the side and it will zoom further - think this is called macro - maybe?

She is looking at a canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM EF lens and
Sigma 18-125mm F/3.8-5.6 OS HSM Lens and
Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM

She shoots both inside and out.

what do you all think? One thing that would help tremendously is a bit on why you suggest one over the other and/or what the lens will do.


Thank you all very much - for helping some true novices.

 

That 28-200, isn't a bad lens. I used it for about six months. But you better have enough light for it.

 

agreed - not bad..... what would you upgrade to?

 

Jupiter - pls disregard my last post. I thought you were referring to the 28/80


sorry

 

Get a 50 f1.8

That is the most accessible fast lens to you and every Canon user should have one. They are under $100 brand new. It's not as easy to use because it isn't a zoom lens, but it will open up the possibilities for low light shooting.

 

Another possibility is getting the Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6. That is the kit lens that comes with Rebel cameras these days.

It should be under $200 and 18mm on the wide end is really useful for the Rebel.

 

^ and Image Stabilization to boot.

 

I know, but the OP asked for really good. But still don't know how much of really good he's looking for.

 

I think, since they are starting out, really good = really useful.

This means a useful focal length with usable quality.

But that's just my guess.

 

does she still shoot 35mm?

If not, I'd find something that starts around 18mm more useful. I found 28mm too narrow on a crop to use as a walk around zoom. If she is used to 28mm on a 35mm, then you'd probably want to find something that starts around 18mm to have the same field of view on an APS-C sensor.

I've heard the tamron 18-270 VC outperforms the canon 18-200. especially when you consider the price and the extra range. I think the sigma 18-125 and 18-200 are supposed to be similar. I haven't gotten a chance to test them, but here is just one review of all the superzooms http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/superzoomtest

a budget wouuld be helpful. The 18-55 IS is supposed to be great for the price, and if she doesn't need a superzoom, getting the 18-55 IS, and 55-250 IS would probably provide better IQ as well as being almost cheaper than all the superzooms.