In a quandary...

So I still brand new to the DSLR, been taking pictures for the majority of my life, but only recently have I purchased a DSLR. That said I have a Digital Rebel, which stinks, my AF is non-working, but I can focus using my hands just fine most of the time. Right now I have the Nifty Fifty, which is fine, especially in great light and I have a stinky, stinky, stinky old 18-55. I am looking for a new lens and have narrowed the field down at least alittle. Main uses are portraiture, I have a 5 month old and I like taking pictures of flowers and outdoors, not really wildlife though...
I am considering another prime, the 28mm of the 85 1.8- I am concerned about the 85 being too long, because I am always have to move farther away from my little girl with the fifty, and suspect I would have to get further away with the 85 if I wanted to get all of her in the shot, maybe I am wrong.. once again not used to changing lens on a camera.
Also, I would like a zoom, maybe the newer 18-55 IS, or 28-105.
I also like the Tamron 28-75 or the 17-50.
Any recommendations or preferences are certainly welcome. I would to make sure I get a good all-around lens for a good price.
Thanks for your help.

If you are serious about your pictures then I suggest Canon 24-70 mm f2.8 L.
You will have a forever lens with this.

I agree that this lens would certainly last forever. However, right now out of my budget, I am looking for something less expensive to use whilst I save for an L lens.

My tamron 17-50 is on my camera 90% of the time. Great lens for not a whole lot of money.

Work your way up slowly. Get the 18-55 IS and a 55-250 IS to begin with.

timstreet wrote in post #6570113
If you are serious about your pictures then I suggest Canon 24-70 mm f2.8 L.
You will have a forever lens with this.

He has a broken old rebel and you suggest a $1000 lens???

original poster - you need to get your cam in order. A rebel cannot focus manually - the VF is too small and dark and the focus screen cannot be used to accurately focus a lens faster than an f/2.8 at best.

I would look for an excellent used 20D ($350) or a 30D ($450) and see where that takes you. You seem to want to learn the camera, and the ergonomics of the XXD series may suit you better. The 50 is a good cheap lens. You can get a 17-55IS kit lens for $150 that is still plasticky, but much sharper and has IS. Also consider a used 17-85IS or a tamron 17-50 f/2.8- you can get either one for $350 - but a rebel with no AF? sheesh.

Thanks for the comments, I did forget to mention I am acquiring a used 40D, so that will take care of the body/focus issue, but still looking for a better lens, I have been on the fence between the Tamron 17-50 or the Canon 18-55IS.
Too bad I don't have a local shop, it would be quite nice to have some place where I could try these lens out before I decide.

Jeaucl,

If you're looking at the 18-55 IS you may want to look a little farther at the 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS. They're going on the forum at about $300-330 used. I used mine for about a week that I bought off of the forum and it was nice, but I upgraded to a 1D MkIIn and can't use it on the camera so up for sale it goes. It has some great features and might serve you a little better than the 18-55 as it has more reach to it.

It isn't great in low light but the nifty fifty will cover you there.

I would suggest the tammy 17-50, I've seen nothing but great shots with it and the 2.8 will do you well with natural light portraits of your little one.