I have a nifty 50, macro, wide angle and the two kit lenses that came with my camera. Eventually I'll get a better telephoto, but I seem to gravitate to the good ole 18-55 kit.
My yearly incentive is about to roll in. I usually take part of it and selfishly indulge myself. Don't judge I work hard for that incentive.
I thought maybe this year I would replace my kit lens, but just can't quite justify it. Would another lens be just fabulous, what would it do that this one won't?
Congratulations on the incentive, I have absolutely no doubt it's well deserved! :) Now quite honestly, the way you've described your situation it doesn't really sound like you feel you're missing shots due to lack of capability in your 18-55 kit lens. If I were in the same position I think I would hold on to those funds to put toward the telephoto or some other equipment. Hate to see spending it replacing a lens that to date has been quite satisfactory for you. Having said that having a bit more range up to portrait focal length (~70-80mm) and a faster lens (f/2.8) might be handy alright. Such a lens would not come cheap from top manufacturers, but Tamron and Sigma might have some "bang for buck" options if you're comfortable with those manufacturers. Just some thoughts... Most importantly, have fun shopping!!! :D
i got myself a really fabulous f/2.8 17-55mm a couple years ago when my kit lens bit the biscuit (it was an older 17-85 but likely a bit better quality glass than your kit lens).
this lens has become my go to lens on the canon and i find the quality really really excellent... most of my recent shots on the canon that are not macro were shot with this lens...
i particularly love the f/2.8 - that may be one of the biggest and most obvious benefits (although i guess it depends on what you like to shoot)... on the downside, it's a heavy beast and it cost a pretty penny...
anyway, i think the pros will expostulate on the qualities of the glass of a better lens which means better image quality... but i can't really explain about that kind of thing properly :)
Doesn't sound like you really need to invest at the dedicated "standard" end. You might consider, try before you buy, one of the "all in one" super zooms. Three that immediately spring to mind are the Tamron 16-300 (a new lens, it's US$900), the Tamron 18-270 (the piezo motor second release) and the Sigma 18-250 (which is on promotion for $300, $400+ off its original list).
All get the job done, and while not professional grade sharp, are certainly more than adequate. They are not particularly fast either. All three have great image stabilization, absolutely essential when shooting long telephoto.
Try before you buy, or buy from amazon so you can return within a week or two for a full refund, no questions asked, if you are less than happy for any reason.
If it turns out you like it, then except for specialized use of the macro or a 50mm fixed length or really wide angle (10mm) you will (probably) use this in place of all your current lenses.
They are not "pro grade" for sure, but don't turn your nose up at them without trying one. I know many an enthusiast who swears by them.
Just to throw my two cents worth in... my first "expensive" lens was a 24-70 f/2.8 which cost more than my camera but it is a fantastic lens that I find a use a lot. Around the same price is a 70-200 f/2.8 that is also a great lens. It really does depend on what you like to shoot, more portraits, landscapes or wildlife. The f/2.8 is the deal breaker as you get that extra light that the kit lens doesn't allow, not to mention the lovely bokeh. Maybe you should try renting a lens for a couple of days and see which one you fall in love with :)
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
this lens has become my go to lens on the canon and i find the quality really really excellent... most of my recent shots on the canon that are not macro were shot with this lens...
i particularly love the f/2.8 - that may be one of the biggest and most obvious benefits (although i guess it depends on what you like to shoot)... on the downside, it's a heavy beast and it cost a pretty penny...
anyway, i think the pros will expostulate on the qualities of the glass of a better lens which means better image quality... but i can't really explain about that kind of thing properly :)
Most of my camera equipment has been the result of my wanting to do something and not being able to pull it off.
Then with too many options I run the risk of missing the shot because I'm standing there trying to decide how I want to go at it.
All get the job done, and while not professional grade sharp, are certainly more than adequate. They are not particularly fast either. All three have great image stabilization, absolutely essential when shooting long telephoto.
Try before you buy, or buy from amazon so you can return within a week or two for a full refund, no questions asked, if you are less than happy for any reason.
If it turns out you like it, then except for specialized use of the macro or a 50mm fixed length or really wide angle (10mm) you will (probably) use this in place of all your current lenses.
They are not "pro grade" for sure, but don't turn your nose up at them without trying one. I know many an enthusiast who swears by them.