Lens Advise for Travelling

[Rubastank]

Hello,

My girlfriend and I will be traveling to Milan, Venice, etc... with a group of friends this year, and we are looking for new options for lenses. I know there's a lot of webpages that offer advise on this subject, but each has its own opinion...

Our gear at the moment is limited: two bodies (450d and 650d) and two lenses, the 18-55mm that comes with the 650d, and a 55-250mm.

We can't decide between a 24mm or a 40mm... Or other which is in a affordable price range.
From my understanding, a 24mm is more suitable for "walking shots" (which I like) while the 40mm is for close-ups and portraits (which she prefers).

So my question is...
What lens do you advise me to buy, and which complements best the 55-250mm?
Which lenses do you advise me to take? And one or the two bodies?

Thanks in advance

 

[DB_Cro]

I wouldn't even consider a prime before I get a higher quality standard zoom which is exactly what I did.
Look into the 17-50 F/2.8 Tamron and Sigma to replace the kit lens, OR, if you're sticking with the crop
bodies, the 17-55 F/2.8 Canon is the best there is (L quality basically) but very expensive. That would cover
both of the ranges you intended on buying with the primes.

Sure a prime is better, but you're still stuck with the so-so kit lens when the prime isn't a good fit.
55-250 (I got that one too) is a lot better then the 18-55 kit re: image quality.

 

[Punisher911]

Depends on your budget. For an affordable walk around lens for traveling, I'd look into the Sigma 18-250. (same one in my signature) It was my walk around until I just received my Canon 24-105 L lens. Getting a good zoom for walk around definitely beats switching between two lenses all the time when you're out and about. I used to carry a kit 18-55 and the kit 55-250. Was always finding a need to switch between the two. So I found a nice used Sigma 18-250 that covered that whole range and it never left my camera unless I needed the 50 f/1.8 for portrait stuff.

 

[soufiej]

Hello,

My girlfriend and I will be traveling to Milan, Venice, etc... with a group of friends this year, and we are looking for new options for lenses. I know there's a lot of webpages that offer advise on this subject, but each has its own opinion...

Our gear at the moment is limited: two bodies (450d and 650d) and two lenses, the 18-55mm that comes with the 650d, and a 55-250mm.

We can't decide between a 24mm or a 40mm... Or other which is in a affordable price range.
From my understanding, a 24mm is more suitable for "walking shots" (which I like) while the 40mm is for close-ups and portraits (which she prefers).

So my question is...
What lens do you advise me to buy, and which complements best the 55-250mm?
Which lenses do you advise me to take? And one or the two bodies?

Thanks in advance

This is another question that gets asked quite often. I would suggest you go through a few forum archives for your answer.

As I've said several times in such threads, think about the number of memorable photos taken before zoom lenses became the lazy man's way of doing photography.

Also, consider how much more of a target you become when you pull out any camera with a big, honking zoom lens sticking out for all the world to see.



Your question though is about which prime lens to purchase so let's stick to that rather than starting off telling you what an idiot you are by wanting something "I" - meaning all those guys telling you not to buy a prime - wouldn't own, eh?

Both the 24mm and the 40mm are great for their price. Neither are as fast as the 50mm which means you are starting at a bit of a disadvantage IMO if you go with only one. You could afford both I think and still have a nice vacation but, let's say you just want one.

I'd very much tell you to buy one lens and use your cash for a day trip to Turin which is the industrial capital of the nation and one of the more "modern" cities in Northern Italy. Lots of hustle and bustle in this area of Italy. There will be plenty to do and see and photograph but from Turin take a short trip up towards the NorthWest to the home of my ancestors, Susa, at the very foot of Monte Blanc and the Italian Alps. The trip will be a photographer's dream IMO.

Back to your lens, the 24mm would be ideal for most landscape shots. At the foot of the Alps, you'll want to take a few landscape shots.

The 40mm or the 50mm would be a bit more city photo friendly IMO. While not imperfect for people photos, the 24 mm will be less than ideal of you want shots of the people of the city. The 24mm demands a bit of distance between you and your subject which is not always available in the city. It's focal length is not what you would ideally select for people photography.

How good are you at post production? If you are good at stitching together panoramas in your software, buy either the 40mm or the 50mm and do your assembly in your computer. If you don't want to bother with post production headaches, buy the 24mm and learn its virtues to best exploit its potential.

canon 24mm 2.8 lens sample images - Google Search

Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM Review

You can google any of these lenses for sample images and how best to use the lens to your advantage.

 

[Dave442]

I think the 40mm is very small, that makes it a good travel lens and as you will have two bodies the other could have the 55-250mm and the 18-55mm for either to use.

By the way, the 40mm is also good for walking shots. You can try out the 24mm and 40mm field of views by just setting the 18-55mm to those settings and not touching the zoom ring.

 

[Rubastank]

Truly thanks for all the replies.

Hello,

My girlfriend and I will be traveling to Milan, Venice, etc... with a group of friends this year, and we are looking for new options for lenses. I know there's a lot of webpages that offer advise on this subject, but each has its own opinion...

Our gear at the moment is limited: two bodies (450d and 650d) and two lenses, the 18-55mm that comes with the 650d, and a 55-250mm.

We can't decide between a 24mm or a 40mm... Or other which is in a affordable price range.
From my understanding, a 24mm is more suitable for "walking shots" (which I like) while the 40mm is for close-ups and portraits (which she prefers).

So my question is...
What lens do you advise me to buy, and which complements best the 55-250mm?
Which lenses do you advise me to take? And one or the two bodies?

Thanks in advance

This is another question that gets asked quite often. I would suggest you go through a few forum archives for your answer.

As I've said several times in such threads, think about the number of memorable photos taken before zoom lenses became the lazy man's way of doing photography.

Also, consider how much more of a target you become when you pull out any camera with a big, honking zoom lens sticking out for all the world to see.



Your question though is about which prime lens to purchase so let's stick to that rather than starting off telling you what an idiot you are by wanting something "I" - meaning all those guys telling you not to buy a prime - wouldn't own, eh?

Both the 24mm and the 40mm are great for their price. Neither are as fast as the 50mm which means you are starting at a bit of a disadvantage IMO if you go with only one. You could afford both I think and still have a nice vacation but, let's say you just want one.

I'd very much tell you to buy one lens and use your cash for a day trip to Turin which is the industrial capital of the nation and one of the more "modern" cities in Northern Italy. Lots of hustle and bustle in this area of Italy. There will be plenty to do and see and photograph but from Turin take a short trip up towards the NorthWest to the home of my ancestors, Susa, at the very foot of Monte Blanc and the Italian Alps. The trip will be a photographer's dream IMO.

Back to your lens, the 24mm would be ideal for most landscape shots. At the foot of the Alps, you'll want to take a few landscape shots.

The 40mm or the 50mm would be a bit more city photo friendly IMO. While not imperfect for people photos, the 24 mm will be less than ideal of you want shots of the people of the city. The 24mm demands a bit of distance between you and your subject which is not always available in the city. It's focal length is not what you would ideally select for people photography.

How good are you at post production? If you are good at stitching together panoramas in your software, buy either the 40mm or the 50mm and do your assembly in your computer. If you don't want to bother with post production headaches, buy the 24mm and learn its virtues to best exploit its potential.

canon 24mm 2.8 lens sample images - Google Search

Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM Review

You can google any of these lenses for sample images and how best to use the lens to your advantage.

This is so on point imho...

For a bit of background, I've always been a entusiastic of photography, but never had the cashflow to truly expand that hoby (my 450d for example, was a super bargain since the person who I bought it from didn't want it anymore and didn't really care about the money)...

I've spent years with the 18-55mm kit, and always felt the need to have a zoom lenses, so the 55-250mm is stm was the first acquisition.
But I've always felt more gravity to prime lenses. So now I'm looking for a prime, and I don't want another honking zoom.
So from what I've been reading, since we have a APS-C sensor, the 24mm or 40mm would "feel better"... but I don't have any practice with either... I read that the 50mm makes more sense in full frame when someone doesn't have any gear... so that's why I didn't listed it... But I also looked at the 50mm 1.4...

 

[DB_Cro]

50 on your body would give you 80mm, you can always try to set your 55-250 at 80mm and walk around with it, see what you
can (and can't) do with that exact focal lenght. It makes more sense on a full frame where it's a more usable all-round, like a
35 would be on yours.

85 is a popular FF choice for portraits so you'd have a great lens for that in a 50mm F/1.4

A lot of people with APS-C cameras own the 50 F/1.8 just because it's a lot cheaper then the wider ones, not because they
actually need the 80mm equivalent.

 

[soufiej]

Truly thanks for all the replies.

Hello,

My girlfriend and I will be traveling to Milan, Venice, etc... with a group of friends this year, and we are looking for new options for lenses. I know there's a lot of webpages that offer advise on this subject, but each has its own opinion...

Our gear at the moment is limited: two bodies (450d and 650d) and two lenses, the 18-55mm that comes with the 650d, and a 55-250mm.

We can't decide between a 24mm or a 40mm... Or other which is in a affordable price range.
From my understanding, a 24mm is more suitable for "walking shots" (which I like) while the 40mm is for close-ups and portraits (which she prefers).

So my question is...
What lens do you advise me to buy, and which complements best the 55-250mm?
Which lenses do you advise me to take? And one or the two bodies?

Thanks in advance

This is another question that gets asked quite often. I would suggest you go through a few forum archives for your answer.

As I've said several times in such threads, think about the number of memorable photos taken before zoom lenses became the lazy man's way of doing photography.

Also, consider how much more of a target you become when you pull out any camera with a big, honking zoom lens sticking out for all the world to see.



Your question though is about which prime lens to purchase so let's stick to that rather than starting off telling you what an idiot you are by wanting something "I" - meaning all those guys telling you not to buy a prime - wouldn't own, eh?

Both the 24mm and the 40mm are great for their price. Neither are as fast as the 50mm which means you are starting at a bit of a disadvantage IMO if you go with only one. You could afford both I think and still have a nice vacation but, let's say you just want one.

I'd very much tell you to buy one lens and use your cash for a day trip to Turin which is the industrial capital of the nation and one of the more "modern" cities in Northern Italy. Lots of hustle and bustle in this area of Italy. There will be plenty to do and see and photograph but from Turin take a short trip up towards the NorthWest to the home of my ancestors, Susa, at the very foot of Monte Blanc and the Italian Alps. The trip will be a photographer's dream IMO.

Back to your lens, the 24mm would be ideal for most landscape shots. At the foot of the Alps, you'll want to take a few landscape shots.

The 40mm or the 50mm would be a bit more city photo friendly IMO. While not imperfect for people photos, the 24 mm will be less than ideal of you want shots of the people of the city. The 24mm demands a bit of distance between you and your subject which is not always available in the city. It's focal length is not what you would ideally select for people photography.

How good are you at post production? If you are good at stitching together panoramas in your software, buy either the 40mm or the 50mm and do your assembly in your computer. If you don't want to bother with post production headaches, buy the 24mm and learn its virtues to best exploit its potential.

canon 24mm 2.8 lens sample images - Google Search

Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM Review

You can google any of these lenses for sample images and how best to use the lens to your advantage.

This is so on point imho...

For a bit of background, I've always been a entusiastic of photography, but never had the cashflow to truly expand that hoby (my 450d for example, was a super bargain since the person who I bought it from didn't want it anymore and didn't really care about the money)...

I've spent years with the 18-55mm kit, and always felt the need to have a zoom lenses, so the 55-250mm is stm was the first acquisition.
But I've always felt more gravity to prime lenses. So now I'm looking for a prime, and I don't want another honking zoom.
So from what I've been reading, since we have a APS-C sensor, the 24mm or 40mm would "feel better"... but I don't have any practice with either... I read that the 50mm makes more sense in full frame when someone doesn't have any gear... so that's why I didn't listed it... But I also looked at the 50mm 1.4...

I can't tell you how to think or what to spend your money on, I can only give you my opinion and it is not based upon using the 50mm f1.4. As I've mentioned in another thread, this is my hobby and, like my other hobbies, I play cheap guitars and I use cheap cameras. I get by.

IMO, low light photography is your reason for going from a f1.8 to a f1.4. How much of that style are you thinking you'll do?

There are a few other optical reasons for the f 1.4 but I am not so sure most non-professional users would be able to point them out with certainty. And, given the state of today's editing software, many of those minor issues found in the f1.8 can be removed or ameliorated in post production. With that in mind, I tend to say use your money on your vacation and not on the lens.

A good lens is no doubt a benefit but, in real world use, how useful is the extra speed of the f1.4? Either lens is likely to be stopped down somewhat for real world use. That means the advantage of the f1.4 is, IMO, somewhat lost. The wide open aperture just isn't going to provide sufficient depth of field for most uses on either lens. For low light, you can buy a tripod or monopod for much less than the difference in cost between the two lenses.

"I read that the 50mm makes more sense in full frame when someone doesn't have any gear... "


Yeah, well, I have my own opinions of what you can read on line. I suppose the writer meant to say the lens worked well on a full frame sensor and will reduce the image down to a different relative focal length on a crop sensor. Don't really know other than you don't own a full frame sensor.

There is one forum member who has gone on an extensive rant about the 50mm and it's problems when shooting directly into the sun. The answer there, IMO, is to not do what shows off the weaknesses of your gear 'cause all gear has a weakness. Learn your gear and you can learn to avoid the pitfalls of the equipment being the cause of problems.

And there has been a suggestion of a very inexpensive alternative; Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 Lens for Canon EF Mount YN50MM 1.8 B&H Photo

I tend to stay with Canon lenses and have no experience with third party gear. Lab tests are just that and IMO seldom represent real world use.

IMO spend your available funds on your vacation. Unless you are the type who sits at home after a year's time kvetching about how the corner vignetting of your photos is driving you crazy, you won't care about the gear, just the memories they evoke.

 

[soufiej]

Let me take you away from lenses for a minute. As I said, the difference between the two Canon 50mm lenses can, IMO, be minimized by your post production software and your skills in pp.

Therefore, if you haven't yet spent your money on software, it's time. People asking "what to buy" questions on the forum tend to focus on the immediate desire for a camera or lens and tend to ignore what can be done and what must be done after the fact with software.

Personally, I rather dislike software but it is a necessary evil once you've committed to a digital camera. Here's a short video on just how much your editing and processing can change a so so photo into something you can really say is special;

I'm not at all recommending Lightroom as your software, but it is one of the more popular editors for both professions and amateurs.

Your monitor and, if you want to print your own shots, your printer also matter. Don't stop simply by looking at the lens. Better cameras and lenses require you support them with better quality gear in your processing.

 

[jaomul]

You didn't mention budget (I think). Have you looked at the sigma 18-35 f1.8?

If you and your girlfriend carry one body each, one carries the 18-55 and the other 55-250 that's not to much to carry each.

Someone above said out your 55-250 at 80 to see what a 50mm prime can do for you. This is completely wrong. 50 prime and 50 on your zoom are the same. It's the sensor size that decides the crop factors, 50 is 50.

I think that the suggestion to get a fast standard lens was best, something like the Canon 17-55 f2.8, or indeed more affordable sigma 17-50mm f2.8 os.

Primes are better at some things, but for travel, I personally don't think so

 

[DB_Cro]

Someone above said out your 55-250 at 80 to see what a 50mm prime can do for you. This is completely wrong. 50 prime and 50 on your zoom are the same. It's the sensor size that decides the crop factors, 50 is 50.

Yes, I butchered that advice, 50 is 50, I wanted to say that he can try that out for every prime that he might consider.
18-35 is a great advice, yeah, I just wish it was a bit wider since I keep wishing my 17-50 was 16-50

 

[jaomul]

Using a zoom set to any prime length one is considering is pretty much bullet proof advice

 

[Rubastank]

Thanks for all the help,

I've been thinking about that today, to use the 18-55 kit on the 24/40/50 lengths and see that feels better and what I'll consider more useful, just didn't do it today cuz its been raining -.-'

 

[soufiej]

Using a zoom set to any prime length one is considering is pretty much bullet proof advice

I have to disagree somewhat. Yes, you will get an approximation of the focal length you would achieve with a prime but it won't be perfect. Plus, how useful is this technique beyond deciding between the very widest and the most narrow prime? Optics will be superior on the prime and lens speed will also be quite different resulting in a totally different photographic result.

Any shop worth buying from has a 30 day return policy. Buy a lens and try it out - the real thing. That's how you can decide.

 

[jaomul]

Using a zoom set to any prime length one is considering is pretty much bullet proof advice

I have to disagree somewhat. Yes, you will get an approximation of the focal length you would achieve with a prime but it won't be perfect. Plus, how useful is this technique beyond deciding between the very widest and the most narrow prime? Optics will be superior on the prime and lens speed will also be quite different resulting in a totally different photographic result.

Any shop worth buying from has a 30 day return policy. Buy a lens and try it out - the real thing. That's how you can decide.

So, some one doesn't know if they should buy x or y focal length prime, and you think it's not good advice to say check on a zoom both lengths and see which one suits better. Ok then, I disagree with your disagreement