Buying first lenses, help?

[juane414]

I recently purchased a Canon Xsi and love it. However, I'm getting tired of the kit lens. I borrowed my friends super nice 70-200mm f/2.8 Canon zoom lense which was awesome, but way too expensive for me right now. Since I'm still new to photography I just want a decent, but inexpensive zoom lens. I would probably use it mostly during the day. A fast lens would be nice, but not necessary. At this point I just want something that can bring me in closer than 55mm. Like I said I'm new, so I can't justify spending a ton of money. I did see that Sigma has a nice looking 70-200mm lens similar to the above canon, but its still around $700. I would like to stay around $300 or less. Also, if I can buy a less expensive zoom lens I can probably afford a 50mm f/1.8 Canon lens which I would really like to get as well. Any suggestions?

 

[keith204]

I recently purchased a Canon Xsi and love it. However, I'm getting tired of the kit lens. I borrowed my friends super nice 70-200mm f/2.8 Canon zoom lense which was awesome, but way too expensive for me right now. Since I'm still new to photography I just want a decent, but inexpensive zoom lens. I would probably use it mostly during the day. A fast lens would be nice, but not necessary. At this point I just want something that can bring me in closer than 55mm. Like I said I'm new, so I can't justify spending a ton of money. I did see that Sigma has a nice looking 70-200mm lens similar to the above canon, but its still around $700. I would like to stay around $300 or less. Also, if I can buy a less expensive zoom lens I can probably afford a 50mm f/1.8 Canon lens which I would really like to get as well. Any suggestions?

Uh oh, you dunnit. If you already used a 70-200 f/2.8L, then you're bound to get one in the future!

The Sigma is a GREAT lens for the price. However, if your budget is $300, I would recommend simply getting the Canon 75-300 III USM lens ($200), as well as the 50mm f/1.8 like you mentioned. Then, you'd have a great range that isn't necessarily good in low light...and, you'd have the 50 f/1.8 which is a great lens for low-light, and very sharp. You can always upgrade later.

 

[juane414]

Thanks, upgrade later is what I'm thinking. If I get serious enough to buy a $1,000+ lens, I'll likely upgrade to a nicer body like the 40D. How is Canon's 55-250mm f/4-5.6 lens with IS? I am a fan of image stabilization.

 

[keith204]

Thanks, upgrade later is what I'm thinking. If I get serious enough to buy a $1,000+ lens, I'll likely upgrade to a nicer body like the 40D. How is Canon's 55-250mm f/4-5.6 lens with IS? I am a fan of image stabilization.

That range seems great, and I have heard people on here who liked that lens. It's relatively new, so you'll have to search for reviews. I know that IS on my 70-200 f/2.8L IS does wonders.

 

[juane414]

Well Adorama has the 75-300mm lens for $190, and the 55-250mm for $280. So I guess it comes down to whether or not the IS on the 55-250mm is worth an extra $90.

 

[Warren_G]

Definitely get a 50mm prime, either the 1.4 or the 1.8, if you get serious at all about your camera, you will be getting one of them one day anyway. It was the second lens I got after my kit lens, and using one will make you appreciate how sharp photos can be with your camera. The kit lens is good, but there is a noticeable difference once you try one of the nifty-fifties.