EF-S 18-125 IS Or EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM lens

I'm looking to get a new lense and I'm considering one of the two. Currently I already have the EF-S 18-55 is and 55-250 is lenses. So as the title says!

Canon EF-S 18-135 IS lense???

OR Canon EF-S 60 f/2.8 Macro USM lense?

The 60mm would be nice for portrait shots and such and it's 2.8/USM is nice but none IS.

I've seen a few reviews about the 18-125 have some distortion and such at higher focal lengths and Vigenetting effects as well. The 18-125 zoom range out be nice as an all around focal length for everyday photography/Portrait's and such.

Any help would be awesome! Also if you have any idea's on another lense that would be awesome as well. Thanks all!

I have the 18-135 and it's an all around good lens, with some compromises. As you say it has vignetting at the long end, distortion at the wide end. It also suffers from a little zoom creep.

The focal length is great, the focusing quick enough.

My suggestion to you is to get the macro. You already have lenses that cover the 18 - 250 range. The macro should open up a whole new world for you.

Macro should be lots of fun, get that

18-125 stinks for portraits because it is an f4-5.6, and f5.6 from like 55+ . You'll have faster apertures in the portrait ranges on your 55-250.

Personally, I've never been able to fully wrap my head around the 60 macro. I think it's too short for a macro lens and not fast enough for a good prime. I'd want one of the macros in the 90-105 range and something faster than f2.8 in a prime. You already have the 18-135 range covered in your kit lens and 55-250 so I really don't see where you'd benefit from it.

18-125 will give you better flexibility as this can be your new walkaround lens
60 would be perfect for Macro (obviously), low light shots, and portrait

so it really depends what you need it for

There is no such lens as a Canon EF-S 18-125 according to their web site.

There is, however, a Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

I'm assuming you mean the 18-135 IS. There's a great deal of chromatic aberration and large amounts of distortion at the edges.

I would stick with your 18-55 and 55-250, both very acceptable lenses. The 60mm macro is best used for just that, macro.

Further more, my suggestion would be to look into the EF 85 f/1.8. Great low light abilities, awesome colors. You can get a great used copy here for the same price as the 18-135 or 60 macro used. Great colors, good focal length. On the other hand I would suggest getting a flash. When learned properly, a flash will do more wonders than any lens similar in price could do.

^^ Thanks on that. I have a 430EX II already. I'll take a look at that lense.

SkipD wrote in post #11221414
There is no such lens as a Canon EF-S 18-125 according to their web site.

There is, however, a Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS.

I assumed the Sigma 18-125 OS.

Either way, the 18-125 and 18-135 lenses are pretty low on the optics hierarchy.

tkbslc wrote in post #11223533
Either way, the 18-125 and 18-135 lenses are pretty low on the optics hierarchy.

+1 When you start getting into lenses that have 5x optical zoom range or more you start to see a great deal of optical quality issues. You're substituting all-around reach for quality really.

The 55-250 is good for what it's worth. I've seen some great quality images out of it. The 24-105L would be a good choice if you want a standard walk around lens. For portraits, your best bet is to stick to a prime with a low f-stop for that bokeh effect. You'll typically see people use a 30-35mm on a crop body and 50mm on a full frame body.

I'd spend more time writing down what your equipment is hindering you from doing. Do you not like the image quality? Is that due to the lens or the user? Do you find yourself using a specific focal length? Do you tend to move steps forward or backward when using that specific focal length? etc etc etc

The questions that are asked more often on here when someone posts a "What lens to get" question are, what is your shooting style and what is your budget?