Lens advice: Help me choose 3 for an APS body

Hi,
I have a Rebel XSi (450 D) with the 18-55 kit lens and the 55-250 f/4-5.6. Am thinking of selling these lenses and upgrading (not the body though).

What I like to shoot (or find myself shooting): land/cityscapes (treks, beaches, travel), portraits (treks, family/indoor, casual), birds, flowers. Do find myself shooting in the early morning/evening light without a tripod.

Have a budget of under $1000 total, so understand that I would need to compromise somewhere (not sure if I need a fast lens, maybe something with IS might be better); also want good IQ, contrast (who doesn't .

Thinking of the following:

Portraits: Canon 50 mm f/1.8 Mk II -- have tried a few shots with a friend's nifty-fifty and like it; not enough dough to buy the 50 mm f/1.4 or f/1.2 though. Also thought about the Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM though it's still $300 over the 50 f/1.8.

Land/cityscapes: Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 - definitely need something wide though 17 on the APS will still not be wide enough. Alternative to this is the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM though that will be almost $300 over the Tammy.

Birds: EF 70-300/4-5.6 IS - understand that this is not the ideal birding lens, but given my budget the 400 ones are out of reach.

What do you folks think?
Also, any $50 recommendations for a decent camera bag for all this gear? (Would that be too low?) Currently have a LowePro but need a backpack type (I think).

Finally, any advice for a $300 travel tripod or is it better to wait until I can increase my budget? (I know, I know, I was asking for lens advice, but what the heck as might well get some words of wisdom.)
Apologies if some of this has been posted earlier. Searched the threads, but thought that it would be better to get advice for my requirements. Thanks in advance to everyone.

The Tamron is awesome but it lacks IS. You say that you shoot in the "early morning/evening light without a tripod." You need IS. I think you should consider IS version of the Tamron, the 15-85mm IS, or the older 17-85mm IS. I have the non-IS Tamron and sometimes I still use the 18-55mm IS just so that I can shoot at lower ISOs at smaller apertures (for dof). YMMV.

The 70-300mm is not getting you a whole lot closer to the birds than the 55-250mm that you have now. You might want to hold off on improving the telephoto lens if birding is the main use.

Thanks, Player9!

Is the IQ of the 70-300 better than the 55-250? I might use it for situations other than birding, so willing to switch if there is indeed an improvement in IQ. Will an extender help for the birds or will it deteriorate IQ too much to be of any real use?
If the Tamron non-IS is indeed good, I might consider investing in a tripod.

Keep the 55-250 IS, Sell the kit lens

The Tamron 17-50 is a good choice. Possibly add a longer fast prime or macro like the 85 f1.8 or 60 macro. If you don't have a flash, pick up a 430EX II.

I think the IQ is better on the 70-300mm. I got the 55-250mm because it was less expensive, lighter, and because I like the 55mm wide end. I don't believe that you can use the Canon brand extenders on the 55-250mm or the 70-300mm.

Consider the Tamron 70-300, it often goes on sale for 350$ and has excellent IS/IQ/build quality.

That said, the 55-250 is decent.

Look at the Tokina 12-24 f4 for the wide end. I do like the 70-300mm for the long end despite its nay sayers. Put the rest in the bank toward a 17-55.

If I could do it all over again, I'd probably get a wide zoom like the tokina 12-24, add a 28 1.8, 30 1.4 or something and a longer prime like 60 macro, 85 1.8 or 100mm macro. Unless you shoot in the middle range a lot, then of course a 17-50 ish lens is nice.
I'd keep the 55-250 too ^^

I would not change 55-250 IS for canon 70-300. keep the lens and change the kit lens for 15-85 IS. better range and nice IQ and IS. Also for the price get the 50 1.8. this will not hurt your budget.

I would also go along with the recommendations for keeping the Canon 55-250IS and getting the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and 50mm 1.8
For most bird shots you will need 400mm - so start saving now!

Looks like you not are rally upgrading, just swapping.
Buy that 50/1.8 you wanted and be done with it.
( I just saved you $900 )

jrscls wrote in post #11736538
Keep the 55-250 IS, Sell the kit lens

The Tamron 17-50 is a good choice. Possibly add a longer fast prime or macro like the 85 f1.8 or 60 macro. If you don't have a flash, pick up a 430EX II.

+1...but i'd add the 50mm...and then maybe a 100mm macro

Thanks everyone for the great advice. Not an easy decision like I suspected, but still plenty of good leads to narrow down to the final buy.

Refresh Image, agree that swapping or changing might be a better word, but just to make sure that I am reading you right, would you describe "upgrading" as getting a better quality (and maybe pricier) equipment with the same specifications as the existing one?

There are a couple of suggestions to go for the 100 or 60 macro. What would be the advantage over the 50/1.8 or 85/1.8? Macro of course, but anything else to justify the price? Haven't really gotten into macro yet. "jrscls", I already have the 430 EX II.

Veering towards keeping the 55-250, getting the 50/1.8, but still undecided on the wide one. Tamron 17-50 or Canon 15-85 or ?

Thanks again.

On crop, I would get canon 15-85 and 70-300 instead.
I know it's slight more than your budget, but it's better saving rather than regretting, right?

samgk wrote in post #11740245
Veering towards keeping the 55-250, getting the 50/1.8, but still undecided on the wide one. Tamron 17-50 or Canon 15-85 or ?

.

depends - Do you think you will use f2.8 more than the extra millimeters ?