Another newbie here

[DSLRBeginner]

Hi everyone,
I am going to be purchasing a Canon 60D in about 2 months time for my wifes birthday. Sooooo lens choice is my main question....

A bit about us..... We will mostly use this camera for Vacation photos and special events with friends and family etc... Although we have never owned a DSLR before we want a camera that is mid-range with the intent we will turn it into a hobby as well. So we may very well take a few classes to learn how to use the camera's many options. This is why we were thinking the 60D over the T3i etc. Price wise I think the Nikon D7000 is over our range and really doesnt give us anything more then the 60D seems to offer.

Sooooo Lenses.... I am leaning towards the 15-85mm Ef-s usm lens. My other possible consideration is the 18-200mm lens? I've read the 15-85mm lens is much better image quality in comparison to the 18-200mm?. I quess not sure if I would find the longer zoom beneficial or stick with better image quality which is the way I am leaning?

Would love to hear thoughts from you guys who have likely experienced both lens first hand.

Thanks
K.J

 

[IgsEMT]

Large zoom ranges tend to loose in quality. Nonetheless they can give a decent results if shot w/in so called quality range (staying w/ f/6.3-16, in zooms b/n 24-170, etc).
Lesses zoom ranges could be a of better quality.
A pretty good lens that could be worth looking into is Tamron 17-50 2.8. Few colleagues I have use that on their Nikon and another one used to use it on Canon before going fx. Unfortunately, quality control on 3rd party glass isn't top notch of brand names so its possible SHOULD YOU pick up one of these that you might end up exchanging for another one (common problem).

Good Luck

 

[DSLRBeginner]

I'm now changing my thought a bit.... Maybe rather than paying the higher cost for the Canon 15-85mm USM lens.... I am thinking about a pair of Tamron lenses ...

CANON EF-S 15-85MM 3.5-5.6 IS USM $999.00

TAMRON 17-50MM XR DI-II F2.8 $469.00 (Is it worth it to get the VC version of this lens?) $599.00
TAMRON 70-300MM F4.5.6 DI VC $499.00

This way I could cover from near to far and still stay within my budget?

Your thoughts guys?

 

[subscuck]

The Tamron 17-50 2.8 is a nice lens. IIRC, the non VC is said to be a bit sharper than the VC version. Honestly, IMO, at that focal range, VC isn't all that useful. Using the 1/focal length rule for minimum handheld shutter speed, you'll be fine w/out it. Good technique trumps VC at shorter focal lengths. Having a constant 2.8 on a zoom is definitely a nice plus. As far as the 70-300, I can't comment specifically, but now you're in the focal range (>200mm) where VC can pay off.

 

[maurice74]

What About the af speed?
I am searching to buy a 2.8 zoom And My first choice would be the 17-55 Canon, but it's expensive.
I have a 50mm 1.8 For Now And i would have a similar quality zoom...