Upgrading from Canon 18-135 IS

Hello! I have a Canon 60D with an 18-135 IS mounted on it that has been fine for many of my needs. I got a fisheye for some fun wide angles (Rokinon 8 mm, aka "you're not getting out of this picture, it doesn't matter where you try to go") last August and a 50 mm 1.8 for Christmas from my brother (also a photographer and lurking around here somewhere).

The three lenses do a nice job covering a good portion of what I enjoy shooting, but I want something with more reach. The 135 mm, even on a crop body, isn't quite cutting it for me. I'm wanting to get something that will put my maximum closer to 200 mm or more. I've been looking at used Sigma 18-250 mm lenses and wanted to get thoughts on that option, since it's not an overly expensive lens.

The snafu in all of this is that the very, very large majority of my money for a new lens will have to come from selling my 18-135. I got it serviced and cleaned last year at a reputable place in NYC, so it is functioning extremely well right now. I keep it in the best condition I can and the only issue with it is a tiny scratch on the front element that, from what I can tell, doesn't affect image quality at all. This gives me hope that I can get a decent price for the lens and put that plus a bit of my own, if necessary, toward whatever I choose.

So what are people's thoughts on the Sigma? Any other lenses comparable in price that people prefer? I have medical bills from a surgery to pay and a very low-paying job, plus a cruise in a few months that I need to have some cash for and a graduate degree to start, so "save and get this awesome $600+ lens" is not something that's feasible right now or in the foreseeable future. I'd really like to not be constrained to shooting out near the 135 mm end and then cropping out excess background on subjects I couldn't get any closer to, which is what I've been doing.

And yes, I tried to do a search, but the search on this apparently new-ish board doesn't really make sense to me right now. If you have any questions about something I wasn't clear about or didn't think of, just ask.

Keep your 18-135. You can't get anything better for the amount of money you'll make selling it. If you search boards/used, you may find a 55-250 II for about $125. Selling your 18-135 to get it would be a big mistake. If you are truly that limited, financially, you should consider options besides DSLRs. A camera like the SX50HS will give you a broader range of focal lengths without over spending.

I would keep the 18-135 and try to find a decent used 55-250.

The sigma is going to be a significant downgrade from the 18-135.

If you are looking for a cheap telephoto option I'd recommend the Canon ef-s 55-250 IS. The old version should be very inexpensive used, and the new ones will offer better optical performance for a bit more cash.

Other lenses i would recommend looking at are the 100-300, which runs a touch over $100 used, our perhaps an old 100-300 f5.6L, which is a bit over $300.

Of the bunch I think the 55-250 STM is the best deal, with image stabilization and significantly better optics than the old one.

The old Canon 70-300s aren't great, but they are cheap, and even they should be significantly better than the sigma super zoom.

If money is right enough that a you can't find something in the $100-350 range of the options above, to be frank, there's probably no better option for you than to keep your current lens unless you would be happy with a downgrade.

I have an original 55-250 that id part with for $100 or so to give you an idea of pricing on that - though the newer versions are better if you can swing them.

Just to clarify, there are 3 versions of the 55-250. Original, II, STM. The STM version is the best of the bunch, but not by huge amounts. I had the II version, it is more than adequate, and well worth the $100, or so, it goes for. The original is optically identical to version II; the only changes were cosmetic.

There is an original 55-250 for sale on POTN for $100. I'd already own it, but the seller won't take paypal.

Thanks for the input so far. Anybody know of some thorough reviews of the aforementioned Sigma lens? I'm willing to trade in a little bit of IQ because, honestly, I'm not a professional and likely never will be (but if you put me in a room with parents and their children, they'll get a free photo shoot out of it). I do photography for my own pleasure the vast majority of the time, but I do love owning my 60D and am well past the point of no return. It was a graduation gift almost 4.5 years ago and if I ever sell it, it'll only be because I'm going Full Frame. Or caving into Nikon so I can... ~borrow my boyfriend's lenses. Yeah... Not take them over and never let him touch them. I would never do that.

If I hadn't just sent off for a passport (my fourth and I have yet to hit 30), I might spend the extra hundred I have this month on the 55-250. I've looked at it before and have read plenty of positives everywhere. The overlap on range would at least mean not switching terribly often.

If I go that route, I'll need a new camera bag even more than I currently do (I own an A-1 and several lenses for that, as well).

Just trying to do my research and make good decisions. I'm glad y'all are willing to be part of that.

Here is the one for $100. It is not mine.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1422119

adivineeternity wrote in post #17485699
Thanks for the input so far. Anybody know of some thorough reviews of the aforementioned Sigma lens? I'm willing to trade in a little bit of IQ because, honestly, I'm not a professional and likely never will be (but if you put me in a room with parents and their children, they'll get a free photo shoot out of it). I do photography for my own pleasure the vast majority of the time, but I do love owning my 60D and am well past the point of no return. It was a graduation gift almost 4.5 years ago and if I ever sell it, it'll only be because I'm going Full Frame. Or caving into Nikon so I can... ~borrow my boyfriend's lenses. Yeah... Not take them over and never let him touch them. I would never do that.

If I hadn't just sent off for a passport (my fourth and I have yet to hit 30), I might spend the extra hundred I have this month on the 55-250. I've looked at it before and have read plenty of positives everywhere. The overlap on range would at least mean not switching terribly often.

If I go that route, I'll need a new camera bag even more than I currently do (I own an A-1 and several lenses for that, as well).

Just trying to do my research and make good decisions. I'm glad y'all are willing to be part of that.

Heya,

So you basically want a super zoom, something wide to really telephoto, to avoid changing lenses. And you want it to be dirt cheap. You don't care about the IQ loss, you say, but you're tired of cropping images from the 135mm. So basically you're willing to trade IQ for convenience of post processing, as in, cropping an image. I'd slow it down and think about what you're doing.

There's no point in selling the 18-135. Keep it. It's a good lens and losing it for a relatively small increase in reach is not worth it.

Getting the 55-250, or a flavor, is going to increase your reach, but only by some. It will not be overly dramatic.

You could however go for a used/refurb 70-300, like that from Tamron. The Tamron 70-300 with VC. You can get it around $300 used/refurb. I'm looking at them for under $300 used, on Amazon right now, primeable. At least this way you're doubling your range, and has recent VC.

Very best,

Having started with the 18-135 myself, I fully support the idea of keeping it and adding a longer focal length lens. Like MalVeaux wrote a 70-300 or maybe even better a 100-400 range would be just about perfect. I added the 70-300L and find lots of usage for it. Looking back I kind of wish I had gone with the 100-400 as you can never have too much reach.

I don't think you will be very happy with a 18-200 type lens as there are some real compromises to making that range - unless you spend serious money on the Canon L.

So from what you have posted, look for a nice 70-300.

I'm definitely seeing what you guys are getting at. I'll have to look for some of the options mentioned here (100-400 sounds so unnecessary but appealing because I like feeling like a superspy, it's just also way out of my price range) and see what I can do. My birthday is in 3 months, thankfully, so I might be able to spring for a 55-250 or, if I'm really lucky, a 70-300.

Guess I need to find a new camera bag. All of mine only barely hold my camera with lens attached and its two friends. If last year's trip to Bermuda was any indication, I'm going to want every single lens with me this year, plus my film stuff.

Thank you guys for your help!

I also think the 70-300L would be perfect for you. Keep the 18-135 IS and you should see quite an improvement from the 70-300L

18-135mm IS is really an underpriced excellent lens, sometimes provided as kit lens. Don't loss this gem or you will ultimately regret as all say here. I sold my 50D with it in like new condition for $399 and am regretting big time...

samsen wrote in post #17486680
18-135mm IS is really an underpriced excellent lens, sometimes provided as kit lens. Don't loss this gem or you will ultimately regret as all say here. I sold my 50D with it in like new condition for $399 and am regretting big time...

I definitely agree about it being under-priced. I'm by and far not the world's best photographer and I have loads and loads to learn and always will (part of why I am so in love with this hobby - I legitimately LOVE learning new things), but once I finally worked out my lens's weaknesses and strengths I found it to be an impressive performer. I did a model shoot with just this lens in 2013 and so many of the photos came out great. They're on my flickr if you're curious, as are the beginnings of my photos from my cruise last year and a random shoot of a friend's kids.

I won't be going the L route, btw. The cost is about what I get in take-home pay over two months, before I pay my bills. After bills, if I have that much left over after a year I had a phenomenal year during which nothing broke and I didn't get sick and I never needed new clothes or toiletries or anything else. A used 70-300 IS USM is more along the lines of the top edge of what I can afford if I'm really careful and have a good birthday at the end of June.

gqllc007 wrote in post #17486671
I also think the 70-300L would be perfect for you. Keep the 18-135 IS and you should see quite an improvement from the 70-300L

The 70-300L is an awesome lens (I'm keeping an eye out for one), but way out of the OP's price range. He'd be looking at a basic 70-300 IS or the like.

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17486739
The 70-300L is an awesome lens (I'm keeping an eye out for one), but way out of the OP's price range. He'd be looking at a basic 70-300 IS or the like.

Just so ya know, I'm a she.