Right Place?

KangarueTheDay · Jan 27, 2015

Hello, everyone! I think I'm in the right place... If not, let me know.

So, I've recently really come to love photography and I'm looking for a few "starter" (for lack of a better term) lenses for my Canon Rebel T3i. I'm graduating at the end of this semester, in May, and my parents keep wondering what I had on my mind as far as graduation gifts. A few lenses came to mind. They'll last a while and I will most definitely put them to good use. My question is... What are some of your recommendations? I'm looking at a telephoto, macro, and wide-angle to start. I've searched online and done some research, however, I'm not familiar enough with the technical aspects to make a good judgement call just yet. I'll put a budget at around $1,000 for each type, but any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

iolair · Jan 28, 2015

What lenses do you already have, and what do you like to shoot?

If by wide angle, you mean ultrawide - Canon's 10-18mm is a damned good option. (Personally speaking I prefer fisheye though).

Macro - If going for a dedicated lens, go for the 100mm over the 60mm; the 60mm doesn't have enough working distance.

KangarueTheDay · Jan 28, 2015

My current lineup includes a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II and a Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II.

Honestly, I like to shoot anything. But, I guess, my priorities include nature and wildlife (landscapes, insects, flowers, animals). Given that, I should probably focus on a telephoto and macro first... But I also like to take photos of architecture, especially when I travel to Europe and South America and anywhere really. Haha.

TCampbell · Jan 30, 2015

Flowers & Insects: Macro lens.
Landscapes: wide angle
Animals: normal (unless you're trying to catch wildlife from a distance)

The least expensive true "macro" lens is the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM, but a 100mm macro lens will give you a better working distance so you don't have to be too close to things like insects. I use an EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM -- which runs around $950) and there's also a non-L series version of the 100mm macro for about $600.

Landscape isn't particularly demanding on the gear. Wider angles tend to be preferred. There are no "rules" so it doesn't have to be wide angle... but usually if you have to "look around" to take in the view, then it helps to have a wide lens. Also, wide lenses tend to "stretch" the depth of a scene (distant objects seem as if they are even farther away). And lastly... you usually want everything to be nicely focused from near to far. This means you don't need a low-focal ratio lens... you'll usually be shooting a landscape at a higher focal ratio (probably f/11 or even f/16). Your 18-55mm kit lens does all of this. If you wanted an ultra-wide lens you could get the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (about $650) except Canon recently introduced the EF-S 10-18mm f/4-5.6 IS STM and that lists for $300.

That brings us to the telephoto. There are a LOT of options here. The 55-250mm that you have is an entry grade lens. Avoid the Canon EF 75-300mm (that's actually a step down from what you already own). but there's a 70-300mm (note it's 70-300... not 75-300) which is a nice step up. But there are so many other choices and it really becomes a matter of how much you want to spend because you can easily drop a few thousand on these lenses. I'm not a birder, but I've noticed that the birders tend to prefer about 400mm focal lengths and even 500mm or 600mm isn't out of the question. Canon has a new 100-400mm version II (about $2200) which is receiving very high praise and the Tamron has a 150-600mm (about $1060) that seems to be well-liked.