RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 50D LENSES..PLZ!

It was kindly pointed out to me on another thread that the lenses I was thinking of buying were "overlapping", so I would really appreciate some guidance on which ones to pursue. My budget is about $700 +/- per lens, and I certainly don't mind buying used from a reliable source. I'm not looking for the best of the best (obviously, with that budget!) but want the best for the buck.

My shooting priorities are: (1) candid people shots (grandkids/couples/chi​ldren); (2) landscape/outdoors (waterfalls, forests, cemetaries, mountain vistas) and (3) sports and birds requiring zooming in for tight shots. I have a Canon EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 that I've been using, but not always thrilled with the results...can this lense be "boosted" somehow?

Thanks in advance! Love this site, i am learning so much!

In my opinion, you'll do best by focusing on one priority at a time. And (also in my opinion) there is nothing wrong with overlap (or gaps for that matter).

Assuming your priority is #1: Candid people shots can mean different focal lengths depending on style and venue. Indoors, the 17-xx range works well. Outdoors, many prefer the 70-xx range so as to be less intrusive/more stealthy. The Tamron 17-50 and Canon 17-55 have an edge indoors because they're constant f2.8. The 17-40L is very good (through f4).

If you don't need the very best why not go with a single good lens instead? Something like the 18-200mm or the 28-300 if you don't need something wide right from the start.

You can then build on that with the 10-22 for the wide end and some telephoto.

Myself I decided on going with very good without needing "the best". So it will eventually be 10-22mm, 17-55mm and some telephoto I have not decided on yet.

I am also seriously considering getting the 10-22 and 28-300mm for vacation lenses. Just 2 lenses that pretty much do it all.

I would recommend the 70-200 2.8 non IS, its a little more than your $700 per lens budget but i think you will get a lot of use out of it considering your priorities, you can find one used for $900. And then a little later down the road you can add a WA...as sleibrand said, focus on one priority at a time and get the best equipment for it

I have the 70-200 2.8 and bought it just for street candids and motocross and it is an excellent lens for for both, and with those two being your priorities i think it would be the best choice for you

I second the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Works great indoors with or without flash, if you have enough light of course. Will work for landscape when you don't need extremely wide. Very sharp lens.
For real wide, Tokina 11-16.
Does your current 300mm lens provide enough zoom for you? If so, you can get a used Canon 70-200mm f/4 L and a 1.4x teleconvertor for $700.
Check the reviews of the Canon 70-300mm IS USM, supposedly better than the 75-300.

I double-checked what you have, and you're about par for the course for a new camera owner. The 28-135 is a good quality consumer lens. The focal length is very attractive for a walk-around lens. IQ on a 50D is somewhat better than the popular 18-55 IS, so it will serve you well. The 75-300 isn't highly regarded, but it will serve you for casual shooting until you get bitten by the "L" bug.

The two lenses you most lack in your kit right now are a fast prime and an ultrawide. The 28-135 isn't wide at all on a crop body like the 50D. Fortunately, the EF-S 10-22 absolutely sings on a 50D. Gorgeous color. Very sharp. Highly recommended. A bit pricey, but pretty much the highest-regarded EF-S lens Canon makes. If you don't like it, you're in luck, because it holds its value really well and you can sell it for 90 percent of what you paid new.

For a fast prime, I've got to recommend the Nifty Fifty. Build quality is mediocre, yes, but optics are excellent. And it's cheap. If you don't want a Nifty, the EF 35mm f/2.0 costs a bit more but gives you better build quality and a more practical field of view on a crop body camera.

Just to echo what others are saying, the Tammy 17-50 is a highly-regarded lens.

jblaschke wrote in post #8689832
I double-checked what you have, and you're about par for the course for a new camera owner. The 28-135 is a good quality consumer lens. The focal length is very attractive for a walk-around lens. IQ on a 50D is somewhat better than the popular 18-55 IS, so it will serve you well. The 75-300 isn't highly regarded, but it will serve you for casual shooting until you get bitten by the "L" bug.

The two lenses you most lack in your kit right now are a fast prime and an ultrawide. The 28-135 isn't wide at all on a crop body like the 50D. Fortunately, the EF-S 10-22 absolutely sings on a 50D. Gorgeous color. Very sharp. Highly recommended. A bit pricey, but pretty much the highest-regarded EF-S lens Canon makes. If you don't like it, you're in luck, because it holds its value really well and you can sell it for 90 percent of what you paid new.

For a fast prime, I've got to recommend the Nifty Fifty. Build quality is mediocre, yes, but optics are excellent. And it's cheap. If you don't want a Nifty, the EF 35mm f/2.0 costs a bit more but gives you better build quality and a more practical field of view on a crop body camera.

i don't think the tokina 11-16 gets enough credit either.

If I were you, I'd get a prime for candids/portraits such as the 50mm f/1.4 or 1.8.

plasticmotif wrote in post #8690196
i don't think the tokina 11-16 gets enough credit either

Really? From what I've heard, this lens is becoming the stuff of legend.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #8689601
If you don't need the very best why not go with a single good lens instead? Something like the 18-200mm or the 28-300 if you don't need something wide right from the start.

You can then build on that with the 10-22 for the wide end and some telephoto.

Myself I decided on going with very good without needing "the best". So it will eventually be 10-22mm, 17-55mm and some telephoto I have not decided on yet.

I am also seriously considering getting the 10-22 and 28-300mm for vacation lenses. Just 2 lenses that pretty much do it all.

The 10-22mm is actually one I'm strongly leaning towards.

mxracer535 wrote in post #8689684
I would recommend the 70-200 2.8 non IS, its a little more than your $700 per lens budget but i think you will get a lot of use out of it considering your priorities, you can find one used for $900. And then a little later down the road you can add a WA...as sleibrand said, focus on one priority at a time and get the best equipment for it

I have the 70-200 2.8 and bought it just for street candids and motocross and it is an excellent lens for for both, and with those two being your priorities i think it would be the best choice for you

This suggestion really interests me; the f/2.8 is good for low light, correct?

jblaschke wrote in post #8689832
I double-checked what you have, and you're about par for the course for a new camera owner. The 28-135 is a good quality consumer lens. The focal length is very attractive for a walk-around lens. IQ on a 50D is somewhat better than the popular 18-55 IS, so it will serve you well. The 75-300 isn't highly regarded, but it will serve you for casual shooting until you get bitten by the "L" bug.

The two lenses you most lack in your kit right now are a fast prime and an ultrawide. The 28-135 isn't wide at all on a crop body like the 50D. Fortunately, the EF-S 10-22 absolutely sings on a 50D. Gorgeous color. Very sharp. Highly recommended. A bit pricey, but pretty much the highest-regarded EF-S lens Canon makes. If you don't like it, you're in luck, because it holds its value really well and you can sell it for 90 percent of what you paid new.

For a fast prime, I've got to recommend the Nifty Fifty. Build quality is mediocre, yes, but optics are excellent. And it's cheap. If you don't want a Nifty, the EF 35mm f/2.0 costs a bit more but gives you better build quality and a more practical field of view on a crop body camera.

If I go with getting the EF-S 10-22mm and the prime 50mm, what could I do with my current EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 to make it better as my action lens? The biggest problem I have with it is not being able to get in tight enough from a distance (when I can't physically move closer)?

Thank you all SOOO much for your help. Y'all make a newbie feel welcome.

chellyroo wrote in post #8690259
This suggestion really interests me; the f/2.8 is good for low light, correct?

Yes, 2.8 is good for low light. It will also help to keep your shutter speed up for sports. But, if you are consistently shooting low light then 1.8 or below is better. I still think that the 70-200 2.8 is your best bet as it will cover both candids and sports which are two of your top priorities.

Then after you have used it for awhile you will learn what it is you want out of a lens that it isnt giving you and then you can buy what you need from there, i.e. a fast prime (or multiple ), wide angle, standard walk around zoom, etc, etc, etc

before jumping into an UWA lens, I would start with somethign like the Tamron 17-50. If you still need wider, than go UWA. Most people will find 17mm to be plenty wide and you don't want to spend $700 of your budget on a lens you use 5% of the time.

your budget is $700 x 3 lenses = $2100 total?

buy the Tamron for $400 and then you have $1700 left to play with.

chellyroo wrote in post #8690304
If I go with getting the EF-S 10-22mm and the prime 50mm, what could I do with my current EF 75-300mm 4-5.6 to make it better as my action lens? The biggest problem I have with it is not being able to get in tight enough from a distance (when I can't physically move closer)?

Thank you all SOOO much for your help. Y'all make a newbie feel welcome.

I agree with Cosmo about waiting for a UWA. Your #1 priority is candid/portrait and its really too wide for that, especially if your just walking around at a party or gathering. Most of my candid shots at indoor gatherings are between 30 and 40mm. Your 28-135 should fit the bill here if you already have an external flash. If you don't have a flash, I would invest in that before an UWA. If you do have a flash, then the 10-22 is a good choice for your vista and landscapes.

Not sure if the 75-300 is compatible with a teleconvertor, you could check into extending your reach that way. All in all it's not a great lens anyway.
You may can find a used Sigma 150-500mm in the $700 range. It's gotten good reviews from birders.