More lens questions . . . will I be sorry?

[TsMom]

I'm nearly ready to buy a DRebel and an additional lens. Seems for the price, I may end up buying the body and 1-2 lenses instead of going with the kit lens, which gets so-so reviews. Let me preface this by saying that I'm on a budget, my primary subjects will be my 2 small children. I'm no pro, just a hobbyist.

I've been lurking for a bit and searching for comments on various lenses and this is what I've come up with. I know everyone raves about the 50mm f/1.8 and I really want one. However, I also want a decent telephoto, so that I can get decent candids without my kids either hiding from me or posing. So cost is a serious issue.

Will I be sorry if I get the 50mm in lieu of the kit lens and the Canon 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6? Also is this telephoto decent? I read mixed reviews of it.

I'm also tempted by the Sigma 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6. I'm open to suggestions for good, but not pricey, wide zooms.

[eosster]

I would always have a least 1 good prime like 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 as for other lens choices, I can't help you with that, never had a experience with third party lens or variable aperture zoom lens made by Canon, I would save a little and buy a good constant zoom lens like Canon 70-200mm f/4 L, IMHO. You would most likely to upgrade to a constant lens, why start with slow variable aperture lens. Good luck with your quest.

[roanjohn]

Hmmm..........you are on the right track with the 50 f1.8.

Now, usually (not always the case).......hyper-zooms (10X or more) don't exactly produce great image quality. If you favor versatility over image quality, then these hyper zoom lenses would be perfect. However, if you are very nit picky about every single soft pixels in your images, then these zooms are probably not the way to go :-(

In defense of the kit lens.........it is not that bad. I would even go further and say that the kit lens might give you a better image quality compared to these zooms (but this is just my opinion). And, for 100 USD, you can't find a better deal in a wide angle.........

So in conclussion, I would suggest the kit lens with the 50 f1.8. And save some cash....and when you get enough......start with a really excellent zoom lens - 70-200 f4L.

Ro1

[pcasciola]

The 70-200/4L is a great lens, but I'm guessing you are not looking to spend $600 on one lens based on the others you metioned you are looking at.

If 50mm is your widest lens on the drebel you are going to most likely have problems indoors, but it's definitely the best quality you are going to get for a lens in that price range. I don't know much about the Sigma 28-200mm, but I do know the kit lens is by far the best wide angle out there for the money, and is better than that Sigma in the 18-55 range.

If you are dead set against the kit lens, B&H is offering this Sigma kit that might be perfect for your budget. $239 for a Sigma 18-50mm and 55-200mm:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=304150&is=USA

[IainB]

I'm not a pro either. I used the kit lens for a few weeks and then bought the Tamron 28-75 2.8 based on the opinion expressed on this forum. I have used it all summer (New Zealand) and found it a real pleasure to use. Two days ago I ordered from B&H the 50mm 1.8 and the 70-200 F4 L along with the 1.4 teleconverter, again based on the feedback here. I think I have the range covered with what seem to be well-regarded lenses. I find the kit lens frustrating with its variable apperture but it's good to have in the bag when required for wider shots. The Tamron may be your best choice initially.

[RJSorensen]

Everyone bashes the kit lens, it is in fashion to do so. I have used it and found it to be just fine for many uses. At 18mm it does a nice job on the wide end and at a long end of 55 you have at least up to normal lens length plus a little. The 75-300 IS might fill your other bill. I have shot with this as well and it is not as bad as many would lead you to think. For what your wants and needs are now and in the near short term . . . I would start there. Then add the 50mm prime as you find a 'real' need for it.

Better to have and shoot than stay home wishing you had what you are not going to purchase at this time. When the time comes you will have the experience under you belt and 'know' what will be right for you.

Best of luck in your choice(s)!

[malla1962]

for the money i think the kit lens cant be beaten.both with kit lens.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'd bet that the kit lens will provide better results than a Sigma 28-200mm.

[OviV]

I say get the kit lens and pick up either the Canon 75-300 (USM and IS if you can afford) or the 100-300 USM. Both can be had fairly cheap. I have owned both of these and sold them without losing much on eBay when I was ready to upgrade. You can save for the 50 in no time since it is cheap or you may put it on an Amazon wishlist for your bday, anniversary, etc. and have someone give it to you as a gift. That's how I got mine.

Ovi

[Maureen Souza]

I have the Tamron 28-75/2.8 and it does a fabulous, crisp job. You can get it from B&H for $369 plus a $40 rebate for the next couple of weeks. I also like my 75-300/4-5.6 IS USM and have been disappointed at some of the negative reviews it has been given here. I also have the 50mm/1.4 which I could never part with as well as the lens kit (which does well if tweaked a little).
I will use all these lenses at the 2 upcoming weddings I am going to shoot without any reservations. Maybe later this year I will add a couple of L lenses to my stash but I am having a great time with the ones I have now.

[TsMom]

Thank you all. I have been struggling with lens choices for far too long. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 looks very tempting, but it is out of my price range - maybe Christmas? and if not that I'll get the 50mm. Seems like everywhere that I post, everyone body tells me to buy L-lenses . . . I wish. I have pretty much decided to get the kit lens, forgo the 50mm for a few months, and get a decent telephoto. Of course, by tommorow I'll have changed my mind again . . .

LaWanna

[DSMITH131]

according to some of the reviews and other web searching people have been under rating the kit lens. I have read that the 18-55mm kit lens beat many other non canon lense and is better than people give credit my 2 cents i would go for the kit and 50 1.8 and save to get the tamron 28-75 2.8 or if you pocket get deep the canon 24-70 2.8

[shybull]

I just bought a Rebel XT with the kit lens and find this lens very sharp. It's sharper than 35-105 and my 100-300 both Canon. I did just order the 50mm 1.8 though. Now I have to sell my G3 and it's accessories.

This was taken with th kit lens

[eosster]

Hmmm, didn't find anyone bashing a kit lens, oh well. Everyone has different opinion about the kit lens, I've don't use it because I don't have one, LOL.

[skyphix]

I think that you'd be happy with the Kit Lens + the 50/1.8.

My path will be this kit lens(already have it) 50/1.8 (soon) 70-200F4L (much later)

I've already got a 70-210F4 that I paid all of 100 dollars for it, but the sharpness leaves very much to be desired in any range. It was 100 bucks, though, so I couldn't pass it up as a "bandaid" to the 70-200F4L.

[KevC]

I think that you'd be happy with the Kit Lens + the 50/1.8.

My path will be this kit lens(already have it) 50/1.8 (soon) 70-200F4L (much later)



Bingo. I have the kit lens, and I love it for the cheap wide angle. Sure it's a tad soft, but stop her down to f/8 and you'll be fine.

The 50/1.8 is an awesome lens, can't beat it for $75.

Save up for the Tamron 28-75/2.8. It'll be an awesome all around lens, that's fast enough too!

[cactusclay]

I'm starting to think that maybe some of the people that look on here for advise, just moved up from a point and shoot, or maybe a film camera and all they really want to do is take pictures of the kids and the pets and just have it around for special occasions. I'm starting to think that some of these people that have used inexpensive zooms in the past are really very satisfied with them and it wouldn't hurt to suggest the 17-55. I think it's probably every bit as good as the point and shoot lenses as well as some of the consumer grade zooms. Perhaps, always suggesting that people get L lenses that don't really need L lenses is providing a disservice and costing people money that they don't necessarily need to spend. Just a thought.

[Medic1]

I second all opinions: 50 1.8 and a 70-200 f4L (if you can save a bit on money first)....you won't be sorry you waited for the L glass