Spec me my next lense?

-Mike-

-Mike-

-Mike-

Soldato
Joined
22 Dec 2002
Posts
10,165
Location
Minehead
Hey All,

Currently I have a 600d with 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8. The book I'm making my way through does quite a bit with other lenses also and I am finding the 18-55 a little limiting.

Where should I be going next with this camera? Any suggestions appreciated :)
 
Depends on what you find about the 18-55mm limiting? Are you finding 55mm too short and you want more reach a lot of the time? If so, then something like the 55-250mm will complement the 18-55mm nicely. Or the 70-200mm if you have more money to spend.

If you like shooting big landscapes/cityscapes, perhaps a wide-angle like the 10-20mm, 10-22mm might be nice.

If you find it limiting because it's too slow then perhaps the Sigma 30mm 1.4 might be nice, or another fast prime.

Until you tell us what you prefer shooting/why you find the 18-55mm limiting we could recommend a ton of lenses, all of which may not be what you're looking for.
 
-Mike- said:
Hey All,

Currently I have a 600d with 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8. The book I'm making my way through does quite a bit with other lenses also and I am finding the 18-55 a little limiting.

Where should I be going next with this camera? Any suggestions appreciated :)
Click to expand...

What are you finding limiting? what lenses does the book ask you to use?

You are missing both a wide angle lens and any telephoto lens. I would look at getting something with more reach that will open up a lot of options for wildlife, street, landscape, architecture, something like a Canon 70-200mm f/4.0, 70-300mm. Ultra wide angles like 10-20mm lenses are a lot of fun and can add so much depth to a photo but they are challenging to use effectively and need a lot of skill and compositional techniques.

As An Exception also suggests, you could sap the 50mm for a wider lens and that can open up a few more options but that doesn't fundamentally change what you can shoot unless you go much wider, say a fast 24mm lens. Even then it wont be too wide on a crop sensor and the DoF wont be that shallow.
 
Sorry guys I should have been more specific! I want more reach for definate, which would be better out of the 55-250mm or the 70-200mm?
 
-Mike- said:
Sorry guys I should have been more specific! I want more reach for definate, which would be better out of the 55-250mm or the 70-200mm?
Click to expand...

Between those 2 the 70-200. I would put the choice between a 70-300mm and a 70-200mm f/4.0. he 300mm is very useful for wildife, you can gain this on the 70-200 by using a 1.4xTC which will cost you 1 stop of light so you end up with a 100-280mm f/5.6 vs a 70-300mm f/5.6, optical quality with the TC on the 70-200 wont be massively better than the bare 70-300.

The 70-200mm f/4.0 option would be more versatile but much more expensive, especially including a TC. TBH, I think the even more expensive 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkiii is a better choice because it is even more versatile, doubling up as a wonderful portrait lens (head and shoulders etc.), but performs better with TV since it is faster, e.g. you can get the 2xTC and have a usable 140-400mm f/5.6 wildlife lens that has AF.

This is a very different budget. Even if you were to buy the 70-200mm f/2.8 a smaller, lighter, cheaper 70-300mm is still a useful lens to have around. I own both and use both of them independently. 70-300 is great for travelling or hiking.
 
The 70-200 f/4 will blow you away. It's a great lens.

I know it doesn't have as much reach as the 300 but believe me you won't mind walking.
 
theheyes said:
The 70-200 f/4 will blow you away. It's a great lens.

I know it doesn't have as much reach as the 300 but believe me you won't mind walking.
Click to expand...

Except if you have to walk closer to a bear, or you have to walk 30miles closer to a mountain, or walk off a cliff to get closer to an eagle. In these cases ou really won't mind boosting your ISO 1 stop.
 
I recently got the 70-200mm F4L and it's definitely nice and sharp :) The lack of IS means you need some steady hands to get decent handheld shots and a tripod is definitely nice to have!

Personally I wanted to get the 70-200mm F2.8L Mk2 but that would have meant waiting a few months longer at least and since I also want to get some kind of wide angle zoom I decided to get the cheapest 70-200mm L lens to fill the gap... Haven't been disappointed yet and it should sell fairly well when I replace it.

Definitely considering getting an extender for some daytime shots though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom