Your top 3 "bang for buck" lenses?

uOpt wrote in post #14534295
Yeah but if your subject is moving the IS won't do it, and then not even a tripod helps.

In that case you can spend the same money on either the f/4 IS or f/2.8 non-IS and the latter will do better for moving subject. The premium for IS on the f/4 (100% roughly) is just a lot of money, that's why many don't place that lens in the bang-for-buck excellence category.

The IS will work in Mode 2 when panning! Additionally,sometimes a blurred moving subject will look good when the rest of the frame is sharp. However, if the entire frame is blurry because of camera shake, NOTHING LOOKS GOOD...

AND... I can hand-hold my f/4L IS in lower light levels than I could hand-hold an f/2.8L non-IS model!

I can shoot with IS assistance using 1/60 second at f/4 with every expectation of getting 100% sharp imagery. I can hand hold at 1/30 second with a respectable percentage of keepers. The equivalent shutter speeds using f/2.8 would be 1/120 second and 1/60 second. I could not expect 100% sharp hand-held imagery at 1/120 second and I would get absolutely NO SHARP imagery hand-held at 1/60 second...

I often think that the remarks about the price of the f/4L IS is "sour grapes"!

My top 3 are kit lenses as they are very cheap as part of a kit and are pretty good too.

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

I would say the 135L, I sold mine for financial and overlap reasons, but I produced images with it that will be in my portfolio for a long time!

It would be a way different top 3 than I had ever planned for, but those lenses would be:
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS
EF 35mm f/1.4L
EF-S 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS

"The Power Trio"

Tamron 17-50 Non-vc
Tamron 28-75
Canon 85 1.8

Dark horse not mentioned
Canon 70-200L non IS

1. 200mm f/2L IS
2. 85mm f/1.2L II
3. Tamron 17-50 f/2.8

Rokinon 35mm 1.4
Canon 50mm 1.8 (a given)
and the 70-200 F4L IS the best midrange zoom in its class. Images are CRAZY sharp and its very easier to handle due to the lighter weight than its big brother the 70-200 2.8L

Samyang 85 1.4
Canon 70-200 F4L non IS
Samyang 8mm fisheye
You cant beat samyangs 'bang for your buck' !!

SAMYANG 35mm f/1.4 (this lens AMAZES me every time, superb)!!

Canon 50mm f/1.8 MkII

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 (non IS)

Zeiss Contax 50mm f/1.7 $150 brand new, absolutely stellar
Canon 100mm f/2.8 macro non-L
Canon 17-40 f/4L

There are other lenses that I love dearly, but bang for the buck on 5D and mkii, no question these are the 3 for me.

EF 85mm f1.8
EF 200mm f2.8 II
Sigma 30mm f1.4

Nifty Fifty.
85mm f/1.8
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 I don't have a crop body now, but when I had an XT I went through a few lenses in this focal range and I kept selling until I found the Tamron. Really liked it, and got a lot of use out of it.

#1 by a mile, the EF-s 18-55mm kit lens ~ free (more or less) with 500D .
#2 EF 50mm f/1.8 ~ $90.
#3 tie between EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 & EF 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 ~ $59 & $102.

That is a whole-lotta bang for very few bucks! There are better performing lenses out there, but they cost a fortune! I sold my prime Ls because they were just too much money for a casual shooter like me. The only exception I've made to L-dom is the 100-400L. There just isn't any real competition. Sigma's 50-150 & 150-500 are just too big, and what good is 500 if it is not sharp? Debated the Sigma 120-400 for a bit. I know I will spend most of my time with this lens at or near 400mm; the Canon is just better wide open at 400mm. I do wish the IS were better.

#1 Samyang 35mm f/1.4
#2 Sigma 50mm f/1.4

#3a For crop body: Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
#3b For full frame: Tamron 28-75mm f2.8

This is like asking which lenses do you own?
No one wants to admit they overpaid for a lens....