I am new to photography. I have the lens I bought with the camera and want to get a more powerful one. The one I have is the Canon EFS 18-55mm. I was looking at maybe getting a 55-250 or so. I also read about a lens that is a telephoto lens that will also do macro shooting. What would be a good next choice for my Canon Rebel T3i? Is it better to not combine the telephoto and the macro, but get two separate ones? Thank you for any feedback.
It all depends on what sort of things you like photograph really. The 50mm f1.8 was the first lens I bought for my 550D and I love it.. Its a good lens to start with, cheap & will teach you lots about photography.
@nebzphoto - I think that most telephoto lenses don't do true macro, i.e. 1:1, but I could be wrong. It's ages since I've bought a new lens - I've got the Sigma 105mm EX DG macro and a Canon 70-300mm telephoto. Both of them are more than adequate for my level of shooting; the latter especially gets some critisism from pros, but I seem to get good results with it.
So while I can't advise you on specific lenses, I would definitely say it's worth getting two seperate lenses.
@miley89@karenanne £70-80 is about right for the Canon 50mm 1.8, which is definitely worth it. The 1.4 goes up to a whopping £240, but like I said, worth every penny. Just depends whether you want to go all the way with the widest aperture.
@miley89@karenanne
I have just upgraded to the f1.4.
Mainly because the auto focus of the f1.8 is very bad and noisy.
Specially at low light (the main reason you would want lens with a good aperture value).
The f1.4 is amazing and worth it. I got the f.18 first and i regret it.
@karenanne Hmm, I did have the 1.8 originally. To be honest I don't often make use of the widest aperture but the build quality is fantastic, the USM motor makes the focusing quiet and very speedy and the manual focus ring is 200x better than the 1.8.
I think it's sharper too, I recently compared some photos with my mates 24-70 and 70-200 L lenses and my 1.4 seemed sharper or as sharp in all the tests!
@nebzphoto The Canon 55-250 will be an excellent compliment to your 18-55, giving you focal lengths from wide angle to telephoto. I'd recommend that as your next lens. The telephoto is excellent for closeups (not macro). If you are really interested in macro, I would recommend a macro prime (fixed focal length) that gives a true 1:1 image.
@nebzphoto
Regardless of what everybody is saying, you should think of what you want to shoot.
If you walk around a lot and need a tele, get a good zoom.
If you try a lot of things, a lot of light conditions, indoors and like to walk around the setting and explore the ambient, or if you want a short tele for do portraits with your cropped sensor camera: get a 50mm.
You will be able to handle some CRAZY LOW LIGHTS. Like this:
If you want to do macro shot, you will need a macro lens.
You can do it with a tele, but that is limited.
This picture i took with a 200mm tele:
And this one with a 100mm macro.
The difference is obvious.
If you want to shoot landscapes or some special effects, go for wide angles such as canon 10-22mm or a fisheye. But those are expensive.
I completely agree with @gabrielklee@soboy5. While a nifty-fifty prime lens is wonderful to have, I would probably want a nice zoom lens in my arsenal first.
@miley89 I have the f1.8 and for the price, I think it's a great lens, but what @gabrielkee said about the autofocus being annoying is so true. It's really clunky and a pain in the backside. Eventually, I plan to upgrade to the 1.4 but my "want list is pretty long right now, it's not near the top of it.
@lisjam1@nebzphoto I highly recommend a prime lens also, either a nifty fifty or a 35 mm. There is no lens that will make you a better photographer faster than a "standard" prime.
I have a 70-300 as I didnt think I would miss the 55-70 that I lose by not getting the 55-200 and I really like the extra zoom to 300. My next lens will be a prime but because I take more wildlife shots I wanted the zoom as a priority. Depends on what you want to be able to take.
@miley89 Yes, you do! I will say I get amazingly clear photos given the price of the lens. I love the lens, just get annoyed with the autofocus at times.
@domstarr , @ellelouise , @karenanne , @hehe1308 , @steampowered , @miley89 , @gabrielklee , @lisjam1 , @soboy5 , @jannkc , Hope I got everyone. Thanks for all the suggestions. Makes me want to get all of them. From reading these I will go with the two different lenses, purchasing the telephoto first and the macro later. The photos that have been posted and linked on this thread are very inspiring. Love this site! @jannkc Jann, I was thinking the same thing about getting the 70-300 rather than 55-250. Couldn't miss too much it doesn't seem. Thanks all!
you're new to photography and you've outgrown your kit lens already? DSLR producers will be happy, buy buy buy, I guess Canon's motto could be you can never have enough lenses.
well lens = purpose. So if you like portraits 85mm f1.8, or the 50mm f1.4 if wildlife then f5.6 400mm, street photography 35mm f1.4 landscapes 24-105mm macro I think is a passing fad so I'd suggest a Sigma or Tamron macro 70-300mm f4-5.6
@steampowered , thanks for the info Paul. I was thinking of buying one on-line but think I'll buy locally just to be sure I get what I really need. thanks. @mylifeinpics39 , Thanks for your opinion!
yeah get the 1,8 off ebay for £60 ish, brill buy. 1.4 is nice, better build and stuff but I don't think you'll be disapointed with the 1.8. If you win the lottery get the f1.2 L
;)
Hi Nancy, I also have the Canon 550d which came with 3 kit lenses, one of which is the 50mm f1.8, I had never used a prime before but now I never take it off! If you like macro you can buy a clip on macro conversion lens from amazon for about £42.00, you just clip it on whatever lens you are using and away you go. Check out my pages for examples.
I have the same camera and loved hearing all the responses also. I agree with everyone that said you should 1st think about what you want to shoot more of. I have the 55-200 and it is a great walking around lens and use it often. However, when I shoot wildlife with my friend and he lets me use his 300 or 400 zoom.. Wow! what a difference! I was thinking that my next lens should be a nifty fifty but not sure... I want them all. lol. Need a winning lottery ticket.
Almost all of my shots are with my nifty-fifty 1.8! I really only throw my telephoto on if I can't reach something. It's perfect for portraits, and looks like a dream in video if you're into that!
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
So while I can't advise you on specific lenses, I would definitely say it's worth getting two seperate lenses.
How much would we be looking to pay for a nifty fifty? I've been looking and seeing a whole range of prices.. About £80 being the highest?
If you're interested, here is one of my shots with the Canon 50mm 1.4 at f'/1.8:
http://365project.org/ellelouise/365/2013-01-07
And here is another one at f/1.4:
http://365project.org/ellelouise/365/2013-01-09
Obviously completely different subjects, but hopefully that'll give you an idea of whether the wider aperture is worth it ;) (IMO, yes!)
I have just upgraded to the f1.4.
Mainly because the auto focus of the f1.8 is very bad and noisy.
Specially at low light (the main reason you would want lens with a good aperture value).
The f1.4 is amazing and worth it. I got the f.18 first and i regret it.
I think it's sharper too, I recently compared some photos with my mates 24-70 and 70-200 L lenses and my 1.4 seemed sharper or as sharp in all the tests!
Regardless of what everybody is saying, you should think of what you want to shoot.
If you walk around a lot and need a tele, get a good zoom.
If you try a lot of things, a lot of light conditions, indoors and like to walk around the setting and explore the ambient, or if you want a short tele for do portraits with your cropped sensor camera: get a 50mm.
You will be able to handle some CRAZY LOW LIGHTS. Like this:
If you want to do macro shot, you will need a macro lens.
You can do it with a tele, but that is limited.
This picture i took with a 200mm tele:
And this one with a 100mm macro.
The difference is obvious.
If you want to shoot landscapes or some special effects, go for wide angles such as canon 10-22mm or a fisheye. But those are expensive.
@lisjam1
well lens = purpose. So if you like portraits 85mm f1.8, or the 50mm f1.4 if wildlife then f5.6 400mm, street photography 35mm f1.4 landscapes 24-105mm macro I think is a passing fad so I'd suggest a Sigma or Tamron macro 70-300mm f4-5.6
most are reviewed on youtube.
yeah get the 1,8 off ebay for £60 ish, brill buy. 1.4 is nice, better build and stuff but I don't think you'll be disapointed with the 1.8. If you win the lottery get the f1.2 L
;)
Almost all of my shots are with my nifty-fifty 1.8! I really only throw my telephoto on if I can't reach something. It's perfect for portraits, and looks like a dream in video if you're into that!