Lenses... which one?

Tatiana_

TPF Noob!
Joined
Apr 22, 2014
Messages
53
Reaction score
2
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I've been looking for a versatile lens to take pictures of my kids. I posted not long ago. I was told something in the 18-135 range would be good. I have a Canon t4i.

I can't decide. Any input on these lenses please?

I'm considering:
Canon EF-S 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 IS STM ($599)
Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Lens($399)
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS ($349)
Tamron 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 DI-II VC PZD Lens ($449)
Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DI-II VC AF Zoom ($199)

Is Canon better than Sigma or Tamron? Reviews seem to be great for all the lenses.

Sigma 17-50 f2.8 @ $369 also caught my eye, but I worry it's not long enough...

I miiiight be able to squeeze Tamron 24-70 2.8 @ 1099$.. But given the crop factor will I miss that difference between 24 and 18?

I know there is no good answer. But any thoughts?
 
From the lenses you mentioned I would get the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 hands down!!!
Second would be the Canon 18-135mm, nice general use lens.
The rest of the lenses you mentioned are super zooms, they offer focal flexibility and the price is degraded image quality.........no thanks!!!
 
I would go for the Canon 18-135mm, just for the focal length range. And you are right: 17-50mm suffers terrifically on the "long end", which is a mere 50mm, far, far less than 135mm.
 
Why is Canon better than Tamron or sigma?
 
Well, because, as a rule, reviews are always great for all new lenses and cameras. Its a business model. Most reviews are actually advertisements. If they are not advertisements, they are from people with limited experience. Actually finding good reviews is super hard.
 
Why is Canon better than Tamron or sigma?

I do not think anybody said that Canon is better than Sigma or Tamron; Canon has a few dodgy lenses, as does Sigma, and Tamron as well, but all three have some fine lenses. Lenses must be evaluated on a lens-by-lebns-model basis; some Canon lenses, like the early 75-300 were always second-rate lenses; same withg the early 18-55 NON-Image Stablizer model Canon kit lens--VERY crappy, but later versions were markedly better.Some Sigma lenses are junky; some are good; a handful are very nice lenses!

I think what goodguy was hinting at is that "suoperzoom" lenses, like the 18-200mm type lenses, or the 18-270mm models, are just not all that good! I had an early Tamron 28-270 I guess it was....UGGG! It was NOT good, but it was "adequate"...I payed $99 for it used from a brick and mortar dealer called Citizens Photo; I gacve it away to a Nikon D50-using grandmother...she LOVED it as an all-in-one lens for grandkid pictures. For me, for more serious uses? The lens was poor.

Both Nikon and Canon have made 18-135mm lenses for APS-C sensor cameras....VERY handy!
 
Among the cameras you specified, as per my opinion canon is better because of the range of manual controls and fast auto focus and have good general use lenses.
 
Personally I would go for the 24-70 2.8 if the budget permits. I shoot Nikon, and the 24-70 is fast and sharp. The focal length seems to be right for a great walk around lens, and for portraits.
 
I'll vote for the 18-135 STM but depending on your current lens and photo subjects a used 70-200 could be better for some situations
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless
 
I think what goodguy was hinting at is that "suoperzoom" lenses, like the 18-200mm type lenses, or the 18-270mm models, are just not all that good! I had an early Tamron 28-270 I guess it was....UGGG! It was NOT good, but it was "adequate"...I payed $99 for it used from a brick and mortar dealer called Citizens Photo; I gacve it away to a Nikon D50-using grandmother...she LOVED it as an all-in-one lens for grandkid pictures. For me, for more serious uses? The lens was poor.

Both Nikon and Canon have made 18-135mm lenses for APS-C sensor cameras....VERY handy!

I agree Superzooms are anything but super. The wider the zoom range, the worse the image quality. It has always been so. There are some great zooms available in the marketplace. Generally they have modest zoom ranges and high prices.
 
Ok, Canon 18-135 it is.
There are 2 versions there USM and STM. Which one is better? I don't do video.
Thanks!
 
Ok, Canon 18-135 it is.
There are 2 versions there USM and STM. Which one is better? I don't do video.
Thanks!

the newer refurbished 18-135 STM is better (sharper)
 
Ok, Canon 18-135 it is.
There are 2 versions there USM and STM. Which one is better? I don't do video.
Thanks!
Okay, I am going to throw a curve at you. Did you get a kit lens with you camera. If so it generally is the 18-55 f3.5-5.6. How do you like the quality of the photos from that lens? It rates the same ( 14) as the 18-135 you are looking at as far as quality in DXo testing which is at the lower 1/3 of the scale. For the same amount you are looking to spend on the 18-135 you can get a 70-200 f4 non IS L lens. The 70-200 series lenses all are very sharp. The 70-200 f4 is the lightest of the series. If you live near a camera store I would suggest you go there an take a look at the various lenses.

As for the gap between 55mm and 70mm. It is about two paces difference.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top