Replacing Beginner Lenses

Earlier this year I replaced my Canon EOS 350D with a Canon T4i.

Assuming that my next employment opportunity pans out, I'm looking to replace two lenses:

• Canon 18-55mm Kit Lens - While I don't think this is nearly as bad as people let on, it's getting on for time for something better. Mine is very old and doesn't even have image stabilization.
  
• 70-300mm ProMaster - I believe that this is a rebadged Tamron. It is also old enough to lack IS.

The Canon EF-s 18-55 STM f/3.5-5.6 is optically very good, and inexpensive. I paid $70 for mine, used. If you want to stay with GOOD, INEXPENSIVE lenses, consider the Canon EF-s 18-135mm STM, and the Canon 55-250mm STM. All well worth the money, if you can find them used.

Bassat wrote in post #18355565
The Canon EF-s 18-55 STM f/3.5-5.6 is optically very good, and inexpensive. I paid $70 for mine, used. If you want to stay with GOOD, INEXPENSIVE lenses, consider the Canon EF-s 18-135mm STM, and the Canon 55-250mm STM. All well worth the money, if you can find them used.

I was doing some research recently, and did hear good things in general about the 18-135mm.

And as stated previously, I don't have a problem with buying used from known good sources.

Agreed about the 18-55mm STM and 18-135mm STM. The 18-135mm USM is more recent and has the same optical formula as the STM, and is supposed to have better focus. They can be cheap when bought with a body. I have been seeing the 18-135mm STM and 18-135mm USM going used for lowish prices around here.

Temma wrote in post #18355572
I was doing some research recently, and did hear good things in general about the 18-135mm.

And as stated previously, I don't have a problem with buying used from known good sources.

Canon makes at least 3 18-135mm lenses. The original 18-135 IS is OK optically, but the worst of the 3. The second iteration is the 18-135 STM. It is optically superior and uses STM focus system which is quick-enough, and silent when used for video. The 18-135 USM is a hyrbid; it uses a nano-USM motor and can focus faster in LV/Video than the STM, but it is optically identical to the STM, and costs more.

you don't want to spend thousands...but how much do you want to spend? aside from a desire for IS, is there anything else you'd like in the new lenses...something that you can't accomplish with your current set-up?

DreDaze wrote in post #18355582
you don't want to spend thousands...but how much do you want to spend? aside from a desire for IS, is there anything else you'd like in the new lenses...something that you can't accomplish with your current set-up?

The used prices I'm seeing on the 18-135mm USM are reasonable to me.

I'm looking for better image quality than the old non-IS kit lens.

The 18-135 STM is a great lens. As others have pointed out, the Canon 18-55 STM lens is optically very good. Just make sure it's the STM version. The non-STM versions weren't so good optically. The combination of 18-55 or 18-135 STM and 55-250 STM makes a great 2-lens kit. I've seen 18-55 STMs going for around $100 and 55-250 STMs for around $150 on my local Craigslist.

About five years ago I bought a T2i and with it I got a Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 as my "normal" lens. I love the lens and still use it and recommend it, but if I were to do it again I would consider the Canon EF-S 15-85 because I sometimes wish I had a couple more mm at the wide end. I've seen the 15-85 for around $500 used.

With the 17-70 I bought the Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM. I've seen these used for around $300. Note this is NOT the same as the $200 Canon 75-300, which is junk.

Mike

Hate to say it, but this sounds like replacing a beginner lens with another beginner lens.

18-55 is worth every cent, but as stated, it's just not worth that many cents. 85mm 1.8 is a great price/performance lens that will add to any kit lens set up.

The prime pancakes at 2.8 are super.

Or go wide with the 10-18 or whatever the latest EF-S super wide zoom is.

Going from an 18-something to another 18-something might satisfy G.A.S. short term, but it probably isn't gong to add anything to your results. I think any of the lenses I mentioned will show you the shortcomings of the lenses talked about already and better, they will help you explore new ground.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18355663
Hate to say it, but this sounds like replacing a beginner lens with another beginner lens.

18-55 is worth every cent, but as stated, it's just not worth that many cents. 85mm 1.8 is a great price/performance lens that will add to any kit lens set up.

The prime pancakes at 2.8 are super.

Or go wide with the 10-18 or whatever the latest EF-S super wide zoom is.

Going from an 18-something to another 18-something might satisfy G.A.S. short term, but it probably isn't gong to add anything to your results. I think any of the lenses I mentioned will show you the shortcomings of the lenses talked about already and better, they will help you explore new ground.

All of that may very well be true, but I'm not sure what switching to (or adding) primes would do for me.

I do absolutely zero portraiture or sports.

80% of what I do is studio macro, for which I have a Tokina 100mm macro.

The rest is casual photography in town and the local park system, with the occasional still life thrown in. Very occasional wildlife photography consists of waterfowl in the park system.

What would you recommend for that?

Temma wrote in post #18355665
All of that may very well be true, but I'm not sure what switching to (or adding) primes would do for me.

I do absolutely zero portraiture or sports.

80% of what I do is studio macro, for which I have a Tokina 100mm macro.

The rest is casual photography in town and the local park system, with the occasional still life thrown in. Very occasional wildlife photography consists of waterfowl in the park system.

What would you recommend for that?

The 18-55 STM and 55-250STM get you there for really cheap. The Sigma 17-50/2.8 gives you 2.8 in the standard range which would help a little in low light situations and is available cheap these days and might be worth the little increase in money over the 18-55. The 10-18 would be a great third lens.

FEChariot wrote in post #18355677
The 18-55 STM and 55-250STM get you there for really cheap. The Sigma 17-50/2.8 gives you 2.8 in the standard range which would help a little in low light situations and is available cheap these days and might be worth the little increase in money over the 18-55. The 10-18 would be a great third lens.

That sounds reasonable.

I wouldn't rule out a 50 STM to the list - it's not exactly expensive, and playing with f/1.8 is fun. You could certainly use it for still life and the park, especially with dramatic low sunlight.

grabbing the 18-55STM and 55-250STM will give you a slight improvement...it won't open up any new photography avenues for you though, it'll just give you IS, and slightly better i.q....adding a prime like the 50STM will allow you to isolate subjects more, shoot in lower light, and give you something you can't accomplish with just the kit lenses...so if you're looking to explore more, it'd be a good cheap addition, if you are content with what you've got but just want to update, then just stick with the zooms

For some reason the Canon 24-105 f4 IS L gets no loving. For that reason, they are a great buy on the used market. I love mine. It's has always been a workhorse for me. This Swiss Army Knife of lenses is built like a tank. Pair this with the Canon 10-18 STM for the ultra wide stuff and you're in business.