LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Lens differnces

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 24 Feb 2012 (Friday) 16:05   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
Rloch
Junior Member
Joined Feb 2012
20 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Hi
After joining a differnt forum a couple of days aog and having no response to my question I thought I would join a more friendly (hopefully) forum.
And in the fear of getting shouted out for asking a question that has maybe been asked already I apologise in advance, but I did have a look through and didn't get anything that helped, so again sorry of oive missed the obvious.

I'm going to be purchasing the Canon 600D shortly but Im not sure which lens to go for
my choices are:-
18-55 and 55-200
or
18-135

Are there any differnce in the quality of the first 2 against the 135? I'm prefering the 135 to be honest but rather than make an expensive and uneducated decision i'd rather get some sound advice from people who use them.

Thanks
Ru

Post #1, Feb 24, 2012 16:05:10




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
xarqi's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
10,435 posts
Aotearoa/New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

Welcome aboard, Ru.

If you really do mean the EF 55-200, then you should go with the 18-135.

If you actually mean the EF-S 55-250 IS, then it isn't such an easy decision.

What sort of photography do you expect to be doing, specifically? "General" doesn't really help us help you much, so the more information the better.

How do you feel about changing lenses as necessary?

What factors do you think are most important in your equipment, like focus speed, telephoto functionality, low light capability, etc.

Do you expect to be spending more on photography in the near future, or will you be "stuck" with what you decide on now for a long time?


Oh - one more thing - where, in broad terms, in the world are you? The economics are a bit different in different places.

Post #2, Feb 24, 2012 16:32:52




LOG IN TO REPLY
wayne.robbins
Goldmember
Joined Nov 2010
2,062 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

For general photography, well, it's highly dependent upon the person. I know that there is a lot out there that will say 18-55/55-250 combo. And then there is those that want a single lens that is more useful under more circumstances ( more flexible) - and choose the 18-135 for its flexibility and range. I like my 18-135 - for a walkabout lens more than I did the 18-55 - which I was always changing out for the 55-250 - and back ... It depends upon the person, I guess.. IMO, a 18-135/55-250 combo would make more sense to me with the overlap.. All I can say is that when out and about - I swap lenses a lot less with an 18-135 than I did with the 18-55..

I might add that I have/am considering a 15-85 - maybe in the near future- not sure yet...

Post #3, Feb 24, 2012 22:04:05


EOS 5D III, EOS 7D,EOS Rebel T4i, Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, Canon 24-105L, Canon 18-135 IS STM, 1.4x TC III, 2.0x TC III, Σ 50mm f/1.4, Σ 17-50 OS, Σ 70-200 OS, Σ 50-500 OS, Σ 1.4x TC, Σ 2.0x TC, 580EXII(3), Canon SX-40, Canon S100
Fond memories: Rebel T1i, Canon 18-55 IS, Canon 55-250 IS, 18-135 IS (Given to a good home)...

LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ C
Member
Joined Jan 2010
97 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I agree with Wayne's comments. The lack of overlap in focal range of the 18-55 and 55-250 combo forces very frequent lens changes for the way I shoot. I also hate the distortion that very wide angle focal lengths yield with people and vertical architecture, so ultra rarely set less than 24mm on a crop lens. The 18-135 would work well, overlap the 55-250 range quite well, and has essentially the same image quality as the 18-55. At additional cost, the 17-85 USM or the 15-85 USM would have incrementally improved IQ.

None of these lenses are really high speed, but f3.5 or f4 is about as fast as most moderate priced zoom lens go.
Can't buy them right now as spent too much on guitars recently, but I am strongly drooling for the 15-85 and a 24-105L additions.

Post #4, Feb 25, 2012 02:43:39




LOG IN TO REPLY
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
xarqi's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
10,435 posts
Aotearoa/New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

David C wrote in post #13963217external link
I also hate the distortion that very wide angle focal lengths yield with people and vertical architecture, so ultra rarely set less than 24mm on a crop lens.

Ummm - don't blame the lens; it's your fault for standing too close.

The 18-135 would work well, overlap the 55-250 range quite well, and has essentially the same image quality as the 18-55. At additional cost, the 17-85 USM or the 15-85 USM would have incrementally improved IQ.

I'd agree that the 18-135 + 55-250 IS would be a very versatile combination. Unfortunately, it is not one of the options that the OP is considering, nor, given the relatively high cost of the 18-135 versus the 18-55, one he would be likely to.

Post #5, Feb 25, 2012 04:33:06




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Rloch
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
Joined Feb 2012
20 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Hi and thank you for the good advice here

ok
I'm in Whitehaven Cumbria UK
I like landscapes, indusrtial, sunsets etc close ups and structures and also a good moon image when weather permits

It seems that the 18-135mm is coming out on top for me, I don't mind having to change lenses but I don't want to have to do it too frequently either.
So the 55-200mm would then be a good choice as a later addition to my equipment.

The guy in the camera shop also suggested a 70-200mm lens (he may have said 70-250 though so forgive me if I got it wrong) as a good lens to go with the 18-135, he also mentioned that the 18-55 wouldn't be as good a lens as the 18-135, because it's a 'kit' lens... I'm assuming he knows what he's talking about and I don't what a cheaper quality lens, so again it puts the 18-135mm on top.

Initially I can only go for 1 lens so I want to get the best I can for my money, I will be adding to my collection as time goes on

Thanks again for the useful info
Ru

Post #6, Feb 25, 2012 06:54:42 as a reply to xarqi's post 2 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
Joined Nov 2010
10,448 posts
Hong Kong
[MORE/SHARE]

Rloch wrote in post #13963573external link
It seems that the 18-135mm is coming out on top for me, I don't mind having to change lenses but I don't want to have to do it too frequently either.
So the 55-200mm would then be a good choice as a later addition to my equipment.

Again, if you mean 55-250 then yes, its a good choice. 55-200, no.

The guy in the camera shop also suggested a 70-200mm lens (he may have said 70-250 though so forgive me if I got it wrong) as a good lens to go with the 18-135, he also mentioned that the 18-55 wouldn't be as good a lens as the 18-135, because it's a 'kit' lens... I'm assuming he knows what he's talking about and I don't what a cheaper quality lens, so again it puts the 18-135mm on top.

He did mean 70-200, you got that one right ;) That is a good lens, but on the pricey side for a beginner. However, he doesn't know what he is talking about regarding the rest of the information. The fact that the 18-55 is a kit lens has nothing to do with it being better or worse. In fact, the 18-135 is also a kit lens. Quality wise they're pretty much equal. It just comes down to price and convenience.
One thing you have to learn is that salespeople generally don't know what they're talking about. They're just out to sell you stuff.

Initially I can only go for 1 lens so I want to get the best I can for my money, I will be adding to my collection as time goes on

What is your budget? Perhaps if you told us we could help you make the best choice.

Post #7, Feb 25, 2012 07:03:15


-Tom
Flickr
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

LOG IN TO REPLY
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
xarqi's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
10,435 posts
Aotearoa/New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

Sirrith covered most of it well. Here's my take on it.

Rloch wrote in post #13963573external link
I'm in Whitehaven Cumbria UK

Not so good. Canon gear is pricey in the UK.

I like landscapes, indusrtial, sunsets etc close ups and structures and also a good moon image when weather permits

Right - no action or sports - all static stuff. That means you won't be needing anything optically fast, and that is good as far as your budget is concerned.

That moon thing - that pretty much rules out the 18-135 - it won't be anywhere near long enough, and that really makes the 18-55 + 55-250 IS the better choice, especially since...

... I don't mind having to change lenses but I don't want to have to do it too frequently either.
So the 55-200mm would then be a good choice as a later addition to my equipment.

What sirrith said - 55-250, yes; 55-200, no.

The guy in the camera shop ... I'm assuming he knows what he's talking about...

Well, you know what they say about assumptions.

... and I don't what a cheaper quality lens,

The image quality of the 18-55 and 55-250 is very good indeed, and you would have to spend maybe 3-5x the money to get any noticeable improvement. They are a bit lacking in some functional niceties, but they are outstanding value, and do what they claim to do very well.

... so again it puts the 18-135mm on top.

Not on that basis, no.

Initially I can only go for 1 lens so I want to get the best I can for my money, I will be adding to my collection as time goes on

If it is just to be one lens for a while, it'll have to be the 18-135 (or maybe the 15-85, or even, if you need reach at the expense of image quality, the 18-200 or the Tamron 18-270).

If you are going to be able to get the 55-250 (or better) within 6 months, I'd say get the 18-55 IS now.

Whatever you do, don't get one of the old versions of the 18-55 without IS, and don't get talked into a 75-300 as a cheap option for a long zoom.

Post #8, Feb 25, 2012 07:29:37




LOG IN TO REPLY
JTodd
Senior Member
Joined Feb 2011
325 posts
Arlington, Texas
[MORE/SHARE]

Tamron 18-270mm VC is probably your best choice for what you're looking for IMO. It's such a nice lens you'll have trouble justifying a replacement down the road too.

Post #9, Feb 25, 2012 07:46:15


5D Mark II
| Canon 17-40L | Canon 24-70L | Canon 70-200L II | Tamron 90 Macro | Sigma Macro Ring Flash | Elinchrom D-Lite 4 IT and BXRi 500 |

LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
Joined Nov 2010
10,448 posts
Hong Kong
[MORE/SHARE]

JTodd wrote in post #13963713external link
Tamron 18-270mm VC is probably your best choice for what you're looking for IMO. It's such a nice lens you'll have trouble justifying a replacement down the road too.

Thing is, at $650, there are plenty of better choices for someone who, like the OP, doesn't mind changing lenses.

Post #10, Feb 25, 2012 07:49:03


-Tom
Flickr
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
Joined Jun 2008
13,794 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

xarqi wrote in post #13963662external link
The image quality of the 18-55 and 55-250 is very good indeed, and you would have to spend maybe 3-5x the money to get any noticeable improvement. They are a bit lacking in some functional niceties, but they are outstanding value, and do what they claim to do very well.

If you are going to be able to get the 55-250 (or better) within 6 months, I'd say get the 18-55 IS now.

Whatever you do, don't get one of the old versions of the 18-55 without IS, and don't get talked into a 75-300 as a cheap option for a long zoom.

I agree, the 18-55IS and 55-250IS is a good combination

Post #11, Feb 25, 2012 07:50:28




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
xarqi's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
10,435 posts
Aotearoa/New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

Oh - one additional thought occurs to me. You mentioned "close-up" photography. In this regard, either the 18-55 or the 55-250 will leave the 18-135 in the dust. They'll each give a reproduction ratio of about 1:3.3, from memory, while the 18-135 is limited to about 1:5.

Post #12, Feb 25, 2012 08:01:44




LOG IN TO REPLY
Rloch
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
Joined Feb 2012
20 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Hi and thanks again to you all

Ok my bugdet is going to be about £800 for the camera and chosen lens(es)

The moon thing isn't an essentail, just sometimes it happens, it's mostly cloudy here anyhow lol

Yes I realise now that the saleman was maybe on commission lol either way he wasn't going to get a sale out of me, their way too expensive in that shop! But it was handy to call in and try the camera out, although they don't have the 18-135mm lens in to try out, none of the local shops have that lens in!

So it seems I'm back to where I started with the choices, I was swaying towards the 18-135mm but now you say that the quality is no different i'm thinking that the option of the 2 lenses maybe more suited 18-55 and the 70-250mm or the 55-250mm..
I don't mind carring 2 lenses I do it at the moment with my Samsung and it doens't bother me.

In one of the shops we have here they have Tamron and Sigma Canon fit lenses, they are much cheaper than the Canon. The salesperson was not helpful in this shop so I don't know whether these would be any use to me or not, they are cheaper but maybe there's a reason for that....? 2 Tamron lenses cost the same as 1 Canon lens, any help about these brands would be useful - thanks

Ru

Post #13, Feb 25, 2012 08:18:29 as a reply to watt100's post 28 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
Joined Nov 2010
10,448 posts
Hong Kong
[MORE/SHARE]

Rloch wrote in post #13963824external link
Ok my bugdet is going to be about £800 for the camera and chosen lens(es)

A 600D + 18-55 IS kit is going to cost you ~£540, leaving you £260, which isn't much, but is enough for a 55-250, and a nifty fifty or a flash. This kit will get you a long way.

This is my recommendation:
600D w/ 18-55 IS II - £540
55-250 IS - £130
Yongnuo 565 EX - £150
total: £820

In one of the shops we have here they have Tamron and Sigma Canon fit lenses, they are much cheaper than the Canon. The salesperson was not helpful in this shop so I don't know whether these would be any use to me or not, they are cheaper but maybe there's a reason for that....? 2 Tamron lenses cost the same as 1 Canon lens, any help about these brands would be useful - thanks

Some 3rd party lenses, especially the newer ones, are just as good as canon or better, or offer 95% of the performance for 60% of the price. As far as the lenses mentioned above (18-55, 55-250), there are no real alternatives in the same price range that give similar performance so you're better off sticking with canon for those particular ones.

Post #14, Feb 25, 2012 08:35:13


-Tom
Flickr
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

LOG IN TO REPLY
Rloch
THREAD ­ STARTER
Junior Member
Joined Feb 2012
20 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I've just been doing some research on prices and I have found a shop that does the
600D Body
18-55mm
55-250mm
Desley Pro bag
8G Hama memory card
and a card reader
as a bundle for £880.00
the camera and lenses come in at £850.00 if priced seperately from this store. I can't find anywhere any cheaper. There is eBay of course but I'd rather get it from a shop where I have the aftersales should I need it :)

This sems like a fairly good deal to me...

Post #15, Feb 25, 2012 09:14:37 as a reply to Sirrith's post 39 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
2,612 views & 0 likes for this thread
Lens differnces
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00224 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.01s
1072 guests, 887 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is chinmoy das

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.