Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Hi I need help choosing a camera lens HELP ME

profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Hi,
I am on the verge of purchasing a Canon 70D and will get a fisheye and prime lens. My main headache is which zoom lens to get. I primarily shoot landscapes with a little bit of action (soccer, skiing) in the mix. Will be 80% photos, 20% video. I have narrowed it down to;
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Lens OR Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM


Feel free to persuade me into something in the 18-55mm range but I like the versatility these two offer.
Thanks and K+ for help
Jan 5 2014 7:48AM
31 3
profile picture
Lou.
Posts: 1787 - Karma: 3,876
Hmm.. ive heard good reviews with both. Ive never actually used either of them so I talk entirely from research, but id say go with the 18-250 simply because of the versatility it gives you
Jan 5 2014 8:07AM
1 0
profile picture
steezysteeze
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 1,012
Those lenses may seem appealing right now but you'll be probably be wishing you got the tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or something similar once you become a better photographer. Because those superzooms cover such a massive focal length they compromise quality. The tamron is only about $300 bucks anyways. If you want way better info on this searchbar because this thread is literally made 5 times a year. Heres a thread I made on the superzoom:
and one on the fisheye:
https://www.newschoolers.com/ns/forums/readthread/thread_id/617338/.
If you really do shoot a lot of non skiing sports like soccer then pick up the canon 70-200 f/4. The autofocus will actually be usable enough for it. I could make some better suggestions if i knew your price range, though.
Jan 5 2014 9:17AM
3 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10056 - Karma: 25,313
The Sigma APO 200-500mm f2.8 would seem like a nice versatile choice.

Quite compact really.

Click for larger image
Jan 5 2014 10:21AM
10 0
profile picture
steezysteeze
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 1,012
^Classic Laurence. I swear to god you must have hundreds of posts like that.
Jan 5 2014 2:17PM
2 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Amazing response, thanks very much! Have heard from numerous sources that super zooms do compromise quality. As an alternative to your Tamron solution, I am looking at getting Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM AND Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM. I don't really want to pay more than $700 for a lens.
Jan 5 2014 9:15PM
1 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
So is your budget $700 then?
Jan 5 2014 9:46PM
2 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Correct.
Also, as an alternative to the 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM, I am looking at the Canon EF 70-200mm f4L USM priced at $670 on DWI. I can't afford the version with Image Stabilisation but is this a superior lens to the 55-250 STM? Thanks again and open to any other suggestions.

Jan 5 2014 10:05PM
1 0
profile picture
Jiberfish
Posts: 1041 - Karma: 310
I have the 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM and its great! Although with your budget, I would pick up a used 70-200 f4 L. I personally am looking to get one within the next year. The constant f4 is a great thing to have and it has the L lens quality at a good price.
Jan 5 2014 10:42PM
2 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Yeh this is precisely what I am thinking. Wondering how big of a drawback the lack of Image Stabilisation is.
Jan 5 2014 10:44PM
1 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Definitely stay away from a super zoom then. The 70-200 f4 is a great lens and you should be able to find it a good amount cheaper than $670. Another one to look into that will be better for landscapes is the 24-105 f/4, still not very wide though.
There's been lots of threads made for people choosing lenses. If you look through the ones made by people with similar interests to you I'm sure you can find some good information.
Jan 5 2014 11:09PM
2 1
profile picture
steezysteeze
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 1,012
It's hard to get a full setup all at once but buying the quality gear one at a time pays off in the end imo. Maybe just grab the 70-200 for sports and a less tele prime for everything else. I'm sure you could get the 70-200 for $500 at the absolute most used, leaving you with $200 bucks left in your budget. If you throw another hundred it there you could get the 17-50 f/2.8, I've seen them go for as low as $250 on my local classifieds.
Jan 5 2014 11:25PM
1 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Yeh my friend has the 24-105 but it obviously not very wide especially on a 70D
Jan 5 2014 11:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
On the topic of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Could you comment on the 17-50 vs Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM? Con's of the Canon would be lack of fixed aperture, but that is offset by the STM motor making for really nice video, and from what I've heard, upgraded optics from previous models. That Tamron looks like a mighty fine little lens though, and I can get it for an absolute steal.
Jan 6 2014 8:22AM
0 0
profile picture
Lewisd553
Posts: 52 - Karma: 286
i got a sigma 55-200 mm lens and they things sick. such good value for money too as i got mine for £200 from amazon! any more questions bout it I'm happy to help !!
Jan 6 2014 8:30AM
1 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Okay thanks mate, I will consider it!
Jan 6 2014 8:57AM
0 0
profile picture
steezysteeze
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 1,012
If you're shooting photos 80% I would go with the tamron, it's optics are great for the price and the larger & consistent aperture really does make a difference. I don't know much about the stm but going on the fact that its a kit lens so I would say that the tamron stopped down to the same aperture as the canon would give you results just as good or maybe slightly better. The 70d is just 100 bucks more as a kit though and I'm sure you could find it used for way cheaper. For only $150 more than the kit you could get the tamron, though. I think I mentioned it before but I'd opt for the 70-200 and 17-50, you wont be disappointed with those 2 lenses and you'll be able to shoot pretty much anything.
Jan 6 2014 3:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
K++ sir, you've been very help. I think that's the best option also. I wonder if this solution undermines even getting the 70D in the first place, since it has that "revolutionary" video autofocus as it's primary selling point
Jan 6 2014 4:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Forcillo
Posts: 3801 - Karma: 3,580
Even with how good the 70D's video autofocus is, you'll find that it's much easier to shoot manual focus, and you'll find autofocus to be a nuisance that isn't that great. The 70D's autofocus for photos is also excellent though, and that alone, along with the new sensor is worth the upgrade IMO
Jan 6 2014 6:20PM
1 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Yes thats what I fear, since besides autofocus, the 7D has much more appeal. My main concern is my lack of experience using manual focus may render most of my footage useless. Rookie question; how do skiers with glidecam's consistently keep their subject in focus? Surely they are not toggling a focus ring as they ski.
Jan 6 2014 9:22PM
0 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Also: 70D or 7D?
Jan 7 2014 4:16AM
0 0
profile picture
Mar-O
Posts: 960 - Karma: 827
If I was in your situation I would have bought the Canon 70-200 f4 and Tamron 17-50mm and just got a cheaper body instead. You can get a t2i cheap now and it wont hold you back any time soon if this is your first dslr. Then when you feel the need to upgrade the body you will have 2 good lenses that you probably wont need to upgrade and you can sell the t2i without loosing that much money.
Jan 7 2014 8:06AM
1 0
profile picture
Jakelapham
Posts: 139 - Karma: 2,657
Thanks for your reply!
This is my second DSLR, but I see you point about the body. I just feel the autofocus on the 70D makes it a winner.
Thanks
Jake
Jan 7 2014 10:14PM
0 0
profile picture
mascotcostume
Posts: 19 - Karma: 8
For your situation i think you should surely go for Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM lens because of its much superior specs including inlens optical stabilization system and hypersonic motor focusing which would surely help you in your case.
Jan 13 2014 6:40AM
1 0
profile picture
plorr
Posts: 3131 - Karma: 528
get the sigma 18-35 1.8, then save up and get a tele zoom or prime later on.

Jan 13 2014 9:56AM
0 1
profile picture
CPOW
Posts: 249 - Karma: 471
what about the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5,6 IS USM ?? around 350$ used
Jan 13 2014 11:09AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)