Pulled the trigger on a 40D, but no lenses

Well, couldn't stand not owning a camera. I previously had a gripped T1i with 24-70L and 70-200L. Also had the 55-250 at one point. I loved those lenses, but I had been irresponsible and purchased it all on credit.

I had bills to pay, and like I said in a few other posts, a ring to buy. But I couldn't stand not having a camera. So I created a "camera" fund. I bought this mint 40D with EF-D Focus screen, 2 batteries and 6k through the shutter. Now I need a lens. I have about $350 to spend on a lens that'll make me happy. I'll probably purchase some primes after more saving (like a sig 50mm 1.4, 135L, 200L).

What would you guys suggest?

I'm looking at a 28-135mm or 18-200.
I like the idea of the 17-70 OS from sigma but am afraid of their inconsistent focusing issues.

I'd say just keep in mind the quality of lenses I've had in the past. I'm not scared of primes. Don't suggest an 18-55, Nifty 50, or 55-250. Been there done that, wasn't impressed.

EDIT: I could expand my budget for a 135L but I'm afraid of owning one long prime on a crop. Might not be much fun.

well congrats on the camera! you will have fun with it.

if you can budget for about $400, i'd go for the tamron 17-50 non vc

and there are many many threads on this lens. good bang for the buck.

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and Canon 85mm f/1.8.

egordon99 wrote in post #11078000
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and Canon 85mm f/1.8.

that's $800 plus together, used. maybe you mean 'or' instead of 'and'?

oh, i see now, he says he could go for the 135L which isn't cheap price-wise. so he could do as you suggested.

SmuckerS2 wrote in post #11078024
that's $800 plus together, used. maybe you mean 'or' instead of 'and'?

OK, start with the Sigma.... For YEARS, many people only shot with a normal fast prime.

Yeah, I can break my budget but it depends on how "worth-it" I think it is.

I am kind-of worried about ONLY having a prime. I guess there is something comforting about having a zoom in your bag in-case you need it.

SmuckerS2 wrote in post #11077978
well congrats on the camera! you will have fun with it.

if you can budget for about $400, i'd go for the tamron 17-50 non vc

and there are many many threads on this lens. good bang for the buck.

+1

I highly recommend getting the Tamron. Although it is not as versatile as the 18-200 in terms of focal range, optically it is much better. Depending on what focal length you want, the 28-135 may not be wide enough for you, especially on the 40D; focusing on the Tamron won't be as quick as the Canon, but a constant 2.8 definitely makes it a great general purpose lens to pair with the 40D!

I realize beggars can't be choosers but I'm just not a fan of Tamron. But I suppose its an economica/sharp option I need to consider

sigma 30 1.4 + canon 85 1.8

If you aren't afraid of primes and know what FL suits you I say get one. Either sigma 30 or canon 28 1.8 would be excellent normal FLs for your 40D

For a sharp lens anywhere near your price range I would recommend you look for a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 on the used market. It's a got a little bit more range than the 17-50 and has a very good reputation. I've been very pleased with mine.

What do you like to shoot?

Personally, the 15-85 has been very good to me. Great range, wonderful IQ and it almost never leaves the camera.

Even if you're not a fan of Tamron, it's hard to beat the Tamron 28-75 as a general lens. Tack sharp, constant f2.8, available used within your $350 budget. I love mine and it's produced some great images for me over the years.

If its just a placeholder lens for that budget I think the 28-135 is a pretty good general purpose lens to use until you can start investing in higher end glass.