Lens Recommendations

It’s hard enough to choose the right camera these days, but lenses are even harder. There are hundreds of them to choose from, ranging from less than $100 to more than $10,000. Unfortunately, the image quality that they produce does not always match their price tag.

Since starting this website, I have been asked one question more than any other: “What lens should I buy?”

Rather than continually filling the comment sections with the same basic recommendations, I thought it would be more efficient to simply post my answers here, once and for all. As usual, though, I’m more than happy to answer further questions or take suggestions.

  1. Hi Mathew,

    Your website seems to be great. I hope you could advise me better. I am novice to photography and interested to take some nice shots. Bought Nikon D5200 with 18-55mm. Now I would like to upgrade to Telephoto lens. Looking for which lens to buy in budget. I am leaning towards Tamron 70 – 300mm. Is it advisable to buy this without VR or advisable to buy Nikkor 55 – 200mm with VR. As both of them are available for equal price. Else kindly suggest any other better lens to buy. Thanks in advance.

  2. Hi Matthew,
    I currently have Canon T3i with 3 lenses(18-135mm, 50mm f1.8 and 55-250mm II). All lenses seems to be good enough for my requirement but I was looking for a decent quality type lens on widest angle which can be used as a normal walk around plus landscape.
    Will it be a good decision to sell the kit lens (18-135) and purchase a sigma 17-50 f2.8 for day to day walk around and landscape photography.
    Any better option that you can suggest?

    1. Hi Mohammed,

      If you have the 18-135 that was a kit lens with the T3i, I assume that it’s the older, non-STM version of the lens. I’m not crazy about that lens… but the new STM version is better.

      Regardless, I’m a little curious about why you’re thinking of ditching it in favor of the 17-50 f/2.8. The 17-50 certainly will give you wider apertures to work with, and that can be very helpful, and it’s a good lens all around. The difference between the 17mm and 18mm though, is pretty insignificant; you wouldn’t be adding anything in the way of wide-angle reach, for all practical purposes. I would buy the 17-50 just for the f/2.8 aperture, because that’s very important to how I shoot… but it may not be worth it for everyone.

      If I were buying a lens to add to your kit, I’d probably opt for something at the really wide end: either the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (or the Mark II) , or the Sigma 10-20mm (which isn’t significantly different from the Canon 10-22). That will give you some dramatic new perspectives to play with, and won’t just overlap part of your previous lens’s range.

      – Matthew

       

      1. Hi Matthew,
        Thanks for your timely respond.
        My concern is I am not very happy with my 18-135 lens as the images are not coming out very sharp all the time. I got some good shots with it but in normal conditions during day time at certain aperture range. I was looking for an upgrade to this lens. As of now I cannot afford a super wide angle lens so I thought of selling it and buying new one.
        I was leaning towards sigma 17-50 f2.8 after going through many reviews.
        I thought with sigma I can get some sharp images plus I can take nice indoor shots at low light.
        Please let me know if I should stay with my current set of lenses and go for a new wide angle lens later or should I sell my 18-135 and get a better lens.
        If your suggestion is second option then please suggest some good lenses?

  3. Hi Matt, I have t3i and sigma 17-70 c. Im looking for longer reach, what would you suggest in terms of IQ and AF accuracy canon 55-250 stm or tamron 70-300 vc usd?

    Tnx

    1. Hi Marlon,

      Unfortunately, I haven’t had a chance to play with the new 55-250 STM lens much yet. That said, the Tamron 70-300 and the old Canon 55-250 were about on-par, image quality wise, with the Canon just a hair sharper, but not significantly… the Tamron actually tests out to be a little sharper than the Canon 70-300 USM. I’d expect the STM and USD lenses to be about equally fast when it comes to focusing, but again, I haven’t used the STM lens much. So, you’d be getting a good lens either way. Sorry I can’t be of more help.

      – Matthew

      1. Thanks Matt for a quick reply… I think i will be for more reviews of the stm… Hope you give me an update once you got it in your hands… Thanks in advance! =) Keep safe…

  4. I just upgraded to my first real professional camera and got the canon 6d. The lens I currently own for that camera are the 85/1.8, 50/1.4 and the 70-300/4.-56 IS USM.
    My biggest question is what lens to invest in that will give me a more wide angle edge. Nothing huge for landscapes, but more for smaller group shots and at weddings. I’ve been debating between the 24-70/2.8 (first generation) or the 24-105. Your opinion? Or perhaps you suggest another? Thanks!

    1. Hi Crystal,

      Between the 28-70 f/2.8 and the 25-105 f/4, I’d always take an f/2.8 lens… and although the 24-105 is not a bad lens, it isn’t the most optically outstanding either.

      If you’re looking for the flexibility of a zoom lens, I’d recommend the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC USD instead of the Canon first gen. It will cost you about the same as the Canon, but it has image stabilization and great optical quality; not quite as sharp (in the lab) as the Canon Mark II, but still quite good.

      If you haven’t seen it already, I can recommend the video comparison I made between the Tamron and the Canon Mark II, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQSuexEQcgM

      – Matthew

  5. I don’t know if you’re still answering questions but how does the 18-55 STM compare to the 18-135 version. Don’t really care about long zoom more so interested in IQ

    1. Hi Caz,

      If you don’t care much about the zoom range, then the 18-55 STM is the way to go. Most obviously, there is significantly less barrel distortion at the wide end of the zoom (about a 25% difference) in the 18-55. The resolution of the 18-55 is also higher at all of the available focal lengths and apertures, though they’re very close, and both are so sharp that it will be hard to tell any difference outside of the lab.  And, of course, there’s a very significant price difference, with the 18-55 STM costing about $240 and the 18-135 STM costing about $550 , though both may be cheaper when purchased as part of a kit.

      – Matthew

      1. Thanks for helping me. Found a new one for 120 and you’re the only person that actually gave an answer relating to image quality. I’ll be checking out the site more often once my first DSLR arrives

  6. Hi~
    I am pretty much decided on buying a 60d as an upgrade to my old rebel xti that I recently sold. I am on budget as is everyone else and I am so torn between the options I am currently seeing that I need to take advantage of now. I am soon to be a mom of 3 so I am an amateur but definitely an enthusiast who wants to take great photos of the family. I cannot decide on which kit to go with. the 60d offers the old 18-135 or the 18-200 or I could get the new 70d with the 18-55 and 55-250 for not much more. I am also hoping to get a 50mm before new baby comes but for now I need to buy a camera asap. Will I go crazy trying to switch lenses constantly especially on our upcoming disney trip or would the 18-55 be sufficient for an everyday lens and then I can pull out the 55-250 for kids games, etc. Having a horrible time trying to decide on options :( Any info would be so helpful! Thanks a bunch!!!

    1. Hi Erin,

      I think you’ll find that with the OLD 18-135 or the 18-200, your image quality will be pretty disappointing, despite the convenience of using the lens. And really, the reason that we’re using SLRs is that we want excellent image quality… right? The lens that you use is usually much more important than the camera body.

      So, of the choices that you’ve listed, I’d go with the 70D and the kit of STM lenses, or the 50mm. Or, if the thought of carrying two lenses is not appealing, then save for a while, and buy the body with the 18-135 STM, which is a great lens. I shoot with a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 on my APS-C cameras most of the time, though… it’s a good walk-around lens, like the Canon 18-55.

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

    1. The resolution on the two is very similar, actually… not a significant difference. At f/2.8, the borders on the Sigma are a little soft, but on the Canon… well, the Canon doesn’t have f/2.8. So that’s a major advantage for the Sigma. The Canon has more distortion at 18mm, but the Sigma doesn’t have anything beyond 50mm. So, they’re different lenses, each with their strengths and weaknesses.

      Personally, I find that the usefulness of an f/2.8 is very important for the kind of work that I do, but the zoom range of the Canon offers more convenience.

      This is, incidentally, with the Canon STM lens only. The Sigma is definitely better than the older Canon non-STM lens.

      – Matthew

  7. Hi Matthew, I’m selling my Canon 55-250 IS II to a friend and am looking to replace it with either the new 55-250 STM or the Tamron 70-300 DiVC USD.  The 18-135 STM is my all-around lens, so I’m looking for the additional reach of either the 250 or the 300, which are both selling for the same price with a current Tamron rebate offer. I am having a tough time finding real reviews of the new 55-250 STM to try to make the comparison. I’m wondering your thoughts. Thanks!

  8. Dear Mathews

    I am thinking to buy a zoom lens for my canon650D, came to know that Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro APO is good ,, what is your opinion ,please advise , also please let me know the difference between APO and Non APO lenses of sigma and which one I need to get

    1. Hi Sidiq,

      With Sigma lenses, some are truly excellent, and some are just the opposite… and the labeling (like APO) might give you an indication, but not always. APO (which stands for apochromatic, which means there’s less chromatic aberration)  lenses should be sharper, but they’re not always really as sharp as advertized.

      So, to really get started in making a choice… what focal length lens are you looking for? Wide angle? Mid-range? Portrait? Macro? Telephoto? What do you want to do with it? There are good choices in just about any category, but there’s no single “perfect lens”.

      – Matthew

      1. Dear Matthews,

        I already have 18-135 STM Canon lens for my 650D T4i ,so now i am actually looking for a Telephoto lens which is better than 75-300, and also affordable in price as a beginner , i will be using this lens for wildlife photography , landscapes and hills

        Please advise
        Thanks

  9. Hi matt,
    Currently I have a Canon 60d with 18-55 IS lens. But i am interesting to buy zoom lens. can you please advise whether 18-135STM lens is compatible with canon 60d model [ i normally taking photos] or alternative best zoom lens for canon 60d.

    With Regards
    Mintu

    1. Hi Mintu ,

      If you’re looking for something in the wide-telephoto range, the 18-135 is a great choice… Yes, it is compatible with the 60D. There are better lenses if you have more specific needs, but not for an all-around good lens.

      – Matthew

  10. Dear Mathews

    I am thinking to buy a zoom lens for my canon650D, came to know that Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro is good ,, what is your opinion ,please advise , also please let me know the difference between APO and non APO lenses of sigma and which one I need to get

  11. Matthew,

    I think I have decided on the T5i, I’ve noticed that there are two different 18-135mm lenses. Is there a difference in the IS & the IS STM?

  12. Hi, the 18-135mm lens that comes with the T5i kit is a new (improved) lens? Because there are not so good reviews about the old one. I want to buy my first Dslr and I don’t want to change lens. What is your opinion? Thanks

    1. Hi Stefanie,

      Yes, the new 18-135mm IS STM lens was announced with the Rebel T4i last year; the previous model (18-135 IS) had been around for quite a few years, and was nearly as bad as the Canon 18-200mm, despite having a significantly shorter zoom range.

      The new lens is optically better, and also uses the “Stepping Motor” technology, which is about as fast a micro-USM motor, and nearly silent.

      – Matthew

  13. Hi Matthew,

    I am currently deciding on a camera with a budget of $800 (can not go over that).  This camera will be used for a campus recreation department of a University. It needs to be able to take great action shots for sports, but also everyday snapshots (indoor and outdoor), landscapes, etc. I’ve narrowed it down to the Canon Rebel t3i or t4i. It looks as the T4 will be too expensive, but will the T3 be ok for action shots? If so, should I get a flash and what kind? What lens is best for this camera for the action shots as well as everyday snapshots. If I get the T3 I might have enough in the budget for 2 lenses.

    Thanks so much!

    1. Hi Kelly,

      When it comes to photographing sports, the T4i does have the advantage of faster burst speeds and a more sophisticated AF system. Someone who has practiced with the T3i, though, will not have any trouble getting excellent photos with it… it’s just fine for sports, especially if the light is decent.

      I’m sure you know that a camera is only as good as the person who holds it; a skilled photographer will be able to take great pictures with just about any camera. When I was in college in the mid 1990s and studying photojournalism, my pro-level camera had half the number of focus points that the cheapest cameras do today, and many people still shot with manual focus… and we still managed to take professional-quality pictures. My advice is always this: buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs, and buy the best lenses you can afford.

      There is, unfortunately, no such thing as a lens that is good for everything. Probably the closest that you’ll find right now is the Canon 18-135 STM that is a kit lens with the T4i and T5i (NOT the one that comes with the T3i, which is an older, inferior lens). Unfortunately, it is much more affordable purchased in the kit with the T4i than separately for the T3i.

      Otherwise, your best bet to stay on budget is the 55-250; it will give you best best reach for shooting activities and sports, and maintains good optical quality.

      – Matt

  14. Hi Matthew,

    I currently have the Canon T3 and am wanting to upgrade.
    What are your suggestions? T4i, T5i or 60D?
    I’ve been taking some Sr. Portraits, Prom Pics & Engagement pics.
    Your advice is greatly appreciated!

    1. Hi Cindy,

      It really depends on where you think your current camera is failing you. If you’re simply looking for higher resolution so that you can make bigger prints, then the T2i, T3i, T4i, T5i, and 60D are all equally good.

      In truth, portraiture and studio work is not very demanding on a camera. It takes a good sensor and good lenses, but that’s the important part. So, you’ll certainly want to make sure that you have a professional quality lens or two. Probably more important, though, is the flash equipment that you use, and the light modifiers. There is nothing that will increase the quality of portraiture like good lighting/modifiers. Most professional portraits, as you probably know, use flash or reflectors, even when they look like they’re natural light.

      So… I guess the question is, what are you looking for in a camera that you’re not getting now?

      – Matthew

      1. Resolution for the most part. A friend bought the 60D & I honestly couldn’t tell a lot of difference in their shots or mine viewing them on the computer. Everyone keeps saying the 60D is a “professional” camera but is it really any better than the Rebels? And I’m trying to keep the cost down. Any lens recommendations?

        1. The 60D and the T2i/T3i have the same 18 megapixel sensor, and the T4i/T5i have an 18megapixel sensor that is slightly different but not any better. If you shoot RAW, there is no difference in image quality between them.

          The 60D is a better camera in several ways that some of the Rebels, but they may not be ways that you’d use. It can shoot faster and longer bursts, it has a faster top shutter speed, faster flash sync speed, etc. I always say: buy the least expensive camera that meets your needs, and the best lenses that you can afford.

          For portrait work, I frequently recommend the Canon 85mm f/1.8 ; it produces beautiful images… but it really depends on what focal length you like to work with. The new Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is a great lens, too, if you work wider… and there are a variety of lenses if you work longer. The focal length you use is a matter of personal choice, though… so it’s hard to recommend a particular lens without knowing that.

          – Matthew

  15. Hi Matthew!

    I’m going on a trip to Australia soon and I was thinking of getting an additional lens to add to my 18-55mm and 50mm f/1.8 kit. I have the 60D. I’m on quite a low budget (as I just bought my camera and kit less than 2 months ago) and I’m trying to decide between the Tamron 18-270mm, Canon 18-200mm or Canon 55-250mm. I’ve read that the 55-250 gives the best IQ out of the 3 but the only downside would be I would have to keep changing lenses and could potentially miss a lot of shots. What do you think? Thanks in advance!

    1. Hi Sharon,

      It sounds as though you haven’t run across my article about all-in-one lenses yet :) I don’t recommend any of them, including Canon and Nikon’s 18-200 or Tamron’s 18-270. They are classic examples of pieces of equipment that try to do everything, but end up not doing anything very well.

      There is no doubt that they are convenient, but so is a point-and-shoot. If you’re using an SLR to get higher image quality, lenses like these won’t help you… especially the Tamron.

      Canon’s 55-250, though it has a modest zoom range in comparison, is much better at what it does. Another lens to consider, if you’re looking for more reach, is Canon’s 70-300mm IS USM.

      – Matthew

      1. Hi Matthew,

        Thanks for the your advice! What do you think about forgoing those two and going for the 18-135mm instead?

        1. Hi Sharon,

          The 18-135mm STM is a nice lens; I would certainly have recommended it if it didn’t already overlap the range of your 18-55. The 18-135 would essentially make that lens useless :), whereas one of these other two would only be adding on to what you can already do.

          The choice, I suppose, is whether you’re more interested in having a lens that is a good, convenient, all-around lens that covers wide-angle to telephoto (then you’d want the 18-135 STM), or if you want a kit that will give you the most versatility overall, at the expense of carrying more gear… in which case you’d go with the 55-250 or 70-300. That’s a choice entirely up to you :)

          – Matthew

  16. Hi Matthew,
    I am about to upgrade to the canon t4i from a t2i. I see it comes with an 18-135 STM lens. I shoot a lot of my kids sports, especially football. Will this lens allow me to shoot good pics from a distance (although I am usually on the sidelines). Another challenge I have where I need a good lens is night time football games where the lighting is always a challenge. I was told the canon 70-200 f2.8 is Il would be a good one for the action and low lighting. That being said should I still buy the t4i with the 18-135 lens? I value your opinion. Lastly I still want a good lens for close-ups of my children. Thank you so much:)

    1. Hi Anita,

      Sorry for the delay; it’s been a busy couple of weeks… somehow I missed this page!

      The 18-135 STM lens is a nice all-around lens; it’s pretty good for sports, though not as good as something like the canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS II, which is an amazing lens (though obviously quite a bit more expensive).

      Lighting at night football games is always a challenge, especially when we’re talking about games at schools rather than professional arenas. An f/2.8 lens is really the best option. The other option is to use several flash units, set up around the field, which is not practical for most people.

      An alternative to the lens mentioned above is the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L (non-IS), which costs about $1000 less. Its also very sharp and fast focusing, and if you’re going to be shooting sports, you’ll need to use a fast shutter speed, so camera-shake is less of an issue and, therefore, the IS is much less important. The non-IS model can be used with a monopod (they only cost $20 or so) which will also provide the image stabilization.

      I think that the 18-135 is a good walk-around lens; it covers a nice range of focal lengths and it’s not too heavy, so you might want to get it regardless of what other lenses you are going to have, though you could get away with the 18-55 instead. I am a fan of the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS HSM, which also gives you good low-light capabilities but at the wide-mid range.

      Any of these lenses should actually work pretty well for close ups, unless you’re talking about extreme close-ups, in which case you’d want to go with something like the Canon 60mm f/2.8 macro. You’ll probably want to experiment with your other lenses first, though, and see if they suffice.

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

  17. mathew;
    i have a few lens questions for you. first, i have the 50mm/1.8 lens and im thinking of upgrading to the 50mm/1.4. do you recommend the upgrade? the price is a pretty big jump so im just make sure if there is much of a difference in image quality.

    also, i do alot of engagments, kids, newborns, etc and i use the 50mm that i have often, but ive been looking at getting either the 17-85mm/4:5.6 or the new IS 18-55mm. other than the cost, do you see much of a quality difference in lens? i also know the 15-85mm has good reviews, but its alot more in price. thoughts?

    thanks!
    crystal

    1. Hey Crystal,

      You’ll certainly feel the difference between the 50mm lenses; the f/1.4 is much heavier, and it’s a little quieter, and it feels more sturdy. When it comes to image quality, the difference is not huge, especially on a crop-sensor camera. Both are nice and sharp. There’s a difference in the bokeh; since the f1.8 only has 5 aperture blades, the background blur isn’t quite as smooth, and the specular highlights there are shaped like pentagons instead of an octagons in those cases in which it’s visible.  Otherwise,  they’re both sharp in the center wide open, but a little soft in the corners until about f/2.8, and they’re almost identical from there. If you have a working 50mm f/1.8, I probably wouldn’t bother with the upgrade.

      The new 18-55 IS STM lens is remarkably good; it has very consistent resolution and sharpness, even wide open, and it doesn’t feel quite as junky as the older version. Between the 17-85 and  15-85, the 15-85 gives you a wider zoom range AND is actually sharper at the wide end, which is the problem with the 17-85 (it’s a little soft around the borders at 17mm, but not bad). But it’s fine… certainly usable. Personally, I find it hard to use lenses that don’t give me an f/2.8 aperture, so I don’t have as much experience with these as some other lenses. I’d take the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 over either of them :)

      – Matthew

  18. Hi Mathew,

    thanks for the great info on this site. I would say I am relatively new to the world of video through the eyes of a DSL-R. I’m graduating from journalism grad school in a week, and wanted to get a kit for my personal/freelance use. During the school year we have been using the Rebel T2i with a 17-50 mm Tamron Lens- which worked great for our digital video pieces. I also have been using a 450 D (Rebel Xsi) since 2010 for taking personal photos with the 18-55 mm kit lens- and I absolutely love it- but alas it does not shoot video. I am now in the market for a DSL-R with video capabilities. I am torn between the 7D, 60D, and the Rebel T5i. Which do you recommend? My professor told me to go with the T5i because 60D is just too old, and she has been facing problems with her 7D, plus that T5i is more appealing to video users- and you could invest better by getting good lenses with the cheaper body.

    Having said that, what lenses would you recommend with the choice of DSL-R especially if I’m looking for video use

    thanks,

    Mo

    1. Hi Mo,

      If you’re interested in video, the 7D is the wrong way to go. If you’re not familiar with the Magic Lantern firmware for Canon SLRs, you should look into it… it adds some very important features… and the 7D is not supported, but the Rebel Series, 60D, and 5D II and III are.

      I’d disagree that the 60D is “too old”, but that’s not really important. The T5i does have autofocus and digital zoom for video shooters, and it’s cheap, which allows you to spend more on lenses… so unless you can come up with a compelling reason to go for another camera, I’d stick with the T4i or T5i.

      And from there, I should say that I don’t do much with video, so I’m really the wrong person to ask about this :) I can recommend some lenses, but it really depends on how you intend to use the camera. Professional film makers usually manual-focus with a follow-focus rig and barn doors, etc. If you’re going to work that way, there’s no need to spend money on autofocus lenses… you can buy cheap Rokinon primes, for example. If you plan on using a hand stabilized camera with autofocus, you’ll benefit from lenses with IS and STM motors…. but all of that is second to the focal lengths so that you can get the perspective you want.

      So, I guess that’s just to say… we should start with what and how you’re going to be shooting, and we can take it from there :)

      – Matthew

  19. Mathew;

    I need your opinion! I have the canon T4i and I take alot of portrait pics (engagement, SR class pics, newborn, etc). I also attend alot of concerts. I like being able to take up close shots if Im not close to the stage. I have the old 75-300mm lens which I hardly use mainly b/c I know that lens isnt great. Do you recommend the new IS 70-300mm or even the 75-300mm IS? I also have the 18-250 IS which works pretty good at concerts, but do you recommend the other ones over that one for that kind of pics? I have read your reviews on the 18-200 IS and I know you dont recommoned it, but it was a gift so I might at well use it when possible or sale it one of these days. Obviously money is a little bit of an issue because I know there are WAY better lens out there—but those were the main 3 I wanted to ask you about. And I also wanted your opinion buying just the plain old canon powershot SX50 for the concert purposes. I havent used that one before, but I had the 35 zoom a couple of years ago. Alot of concert venues wont allow “professional” cameras into the venue so I just wondered if going the powershot route was worth it for concert purposes. I just wanted to know your opinion on the overall quality of picture with that camera if you have even used it at all.

    Thanks!
    Crystal

    1. Hey Crystal,

      I’m afraid that I don’t know anything about the SX50 in particular. However, you’ll probably find that it will produce more digital noise in the low light of a concert setting. That is typical of the small sensors of compact cameras.

      The 75-300 isn’t too bad; I’d use it over the 18-200 if those were my options, and the 55-250 is probably sharper than both of them. The 70-300 USM is going to give you somewhat faster focusing and really nice image quality, but not “L” quality.

      Having done a fair amount of concert photography myself, the major problem that I encounter is not the optical quality of the lens, but the amount of light that it will let in. I’m assuming that you know how aperture numbers work… so a Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens ($100) lets in more than 8 times as much light as any of those zoom lenses at f/5.6… which is the difference between shooting at 1/30th sec. and 1/250th sec, or ISO3200 and ISO400, etc.

      So, that said, you might think about using a lens that will give you more light, even though you will either have to get closer to the stage (or spend tons of money). Canon’s 85mm f/1.8 is not too expensive, and will give you tons of light, a little more reach than the 50mm, … and it’s not huge, so it’s a little more discreet than some of the zoom lenses.

      Otherwise, to get a good amount of light, you’ll need to start looking at professional zoom lenses, and even the cheap ones cost a lot: the older Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is not too expensive now ($770), though the focusing is not as fast as their newer lens… and like all large aperture zoom lenses, it’s a pretty hefty piece of equipment.

      – Matthew

       

      1. Mathew;
        What do u think of the tamron AF 17-50mm/2.8 XR Di II LD IF lens for canon? I found one on eBay for a good price but wasn’t sure if that was a good off brand since I’ve only bought canon lens.
        Thanks!

        1. Hi Crystal,

          I’ve read good things about the Tamron version of the lens, but I don’t have much experience with it myself. Tests seem to show that the optics are about on par with the Sigma, but I like the Sigma because it has image stabilization to go along with it. If you can get the Tamron for a good price, though, I’d say go for it.

          – Matt

  20. Hi Matt, I wanted to your advice and recommendation about the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Standard & Medium Telephoto Lens. I am planning to buy this lens, is this good with regards to quality of the optics, picture quality, reliability etc. Kindly suggest alternatives lenses as well(tamaron or others) which you think will be better than canon or equally good. Thanks in Advance.

    Elango

    1. Hi Elango,

      The Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM is a standard workhorse; it’s a great lens, with flaws typical of the type: at wide apertures, it’s a bit soft away from the center, but in the center, it’s extremely sharp, especially when stopped down to f/5.6.  On an APS-C camera, the border sharpness is not an issue due to the sweet-spot effect of the smaller sensor.

      The Sigma 50mm is actually more expensive, and although it is probably a little sharper in the center, its much softer at the borders wide open, and even when stopped down. I don’t really recommend it.

      For a prime in this price range, I don’t know of a better option than the Canon.

      – Matthew

  21. Hi Mathew,

    I started off with Canon EOS 60D with 18-135mm kit lens. I like the Picture quality and its faster fps. Then i sold it and got 7d. I loved it but the camera is really heavy specially with added lenses. I plan to go into full frame but I have lenses which are for crop format(EF-S lenses) like 18-135 STM and 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens.

    So what would you recommend
    1. staying with canon 7d with the exisitng lens
    2. Selling my lenses and buying 6d with 24-105 mm and 70-300mm
    3. Buying t5i so can use my 18-135 mm stm lens and 15-85mm EF-S lens
    4. Wait for Canon 7d Mark II, or Canon 700D

    1. Hi Roshz,

      If you’re concerned about the weight of the 7D and think you’ll eventually go full frame, I’d probably go with the Canon 6D. I actually really like it; I have a 5D Mark III, but the 6D has a nice feel and the image quality is great.

      My guess is that the 70D and the 7D Mark II will both be heavier, metal-body SLRs, like the 7D. Moving down to the T5i from the 7D would be hard; I think you’d feel like you were playing with a toy camera.

      But, I also don’t know all of the reasons that you’re thinking about changing cameras… so I don’t know if you’ll gain anything from switching or not. You may be best off sticking with what you have. Beyond the weight, what other issues are you having?

      – Matthew

      1. Mathew,
        Thanks for your insight. I just love 7d but I am stuck with EF-S lens as metioned above and if i move on to full frame i will actually have to sell those lenses and get EF ones. Which lenses would you recommned me getting with 6d- A combination of 24-105 and 70-300. I would like to get one good lens for low light, portrait , kids, games and everyday use and other one for zoom, scenery, zoo etc.

        Your response is really appreciated.

        Thanks
        Roshz

  22. Hi Matthew,

    Please allow me to present some background (a summary of my thoughts and current level of understanding) first.

    I was thinking of going for the T3i with the 18-55 and 55-250 combo along with a 50mm f/1.8 till I noticed the T4i with the same lenses would cost me just $70 more!

    Thinking about the T4i got me interested in the 18-135 STM (wasn’t really keen on the non STM version with the T3i). It’s a bit more expensive but more convenient. I could add the 55-250 and the 50 f1.8 to this albeit with some redundancy. Despite the redundancy it’s not hard to imagine these lenses serving specific needs. 18-135 would be general walk-around lens, 55-250 for some telephoto work at the zoo and for excursions into the country, and the prime for some low light and portrait shots.

    I have very little use for video. I’m a beginner (but also a fast learner if I may say so myself) and mainly interested in nature shots (close ups of flowers/fruits, landscapes in gardens or national parks, wildlife, sunrise/sunsets, etc.) and some general walk around photography that will include people/portraits. Might venture towards Macro after getting a better grip on the above mentioned areas of interest.

    With that background, here are my questions

    1) T3i or T4i? Do the improvements in focus points, fps, etc justify the $70? I think it does but, frankly, I don’t know how big a difference those things will make. This is not lens related directly but it governs the choice of lens so it seems relevant.
    2) Is the 18-55 and 55-250 a good pair for the T4i just as it was for the T3i? Will the recently announced 18-55 STM leave the current IS II version outdated?
    3) Is there any benefit of STM lenses if I’m not keen on videos?
    4) Would the choice of the camera body affect whether I should go for the 50 f1.8 or the 40mm pancake? Again the T4i and the STM got me interested in the pancake, which, some say, produces sharper images and better bokeh.

    Based on my analysis thus far the cheapest option for me is T3i + 18-55 + 55-250 + 50 f1.8 and the most expensive one is T4i + 18-135 STM + 55-250 + 40mm STM f2.8

    There are some permutations that are in between these two. Would love to read your thoughts on this.

    Apologies if I’ve made this too complicated. And thanks for your considered views.

    SS

  23. Dear Mathew

    I have seen all your comments and its appreciable

    I would like to know if you are choosing a lens for canon t4i
    Which one you will prefer if it is canon 18-135 is or Sigma SIGMA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 MACRO DC OS HSM and why
    Please advice

    1. The optical quality of the 18-135 STM lens from Canon is much much better than the 18-250 from Sigma. Of course, the Sigma has extra reach, but with a loss of quality.

      In general, the more zoom range that you try to include into a single lens, the worse the optical quality will be at any given focal length… so all-in-one lenses like the Sigma, the Tamron 18-280, or even the Canon and Nikon 18-200mm lenses have some pretty major optical problems. They may be acceptable to some people, by my thinking is this: if convenience is more important to you than image quality, why not just use a point-and-shoot?

      – Matthew

  24. Hi there Matthew,

    Wow, what a great site you have! I’m quite pleased that I happened to stumble upon this little gem. I am about to delve into the world of SLRs, though I know very little about them. I travel quite a bit though, and I love taking photos, so I figure it’ll be a great investment and I have a fair bit of free time to learn how to use it.
    I’ve got my eyes on either a Rebel T4i or a 60D. But I think I am leaning more towards the 60D. My friend is a great photographer and he has the 550D, and shoots with a Tamron Super Zoom 18-270, a Sigma Wide Angle 10-20, and a Canon Prime 50mm. I love his photos and would love to get some similar lenses. I’ve read a lot of reviews on the 50mm, so I am definitely sold on that one. Most of my photography consists of wildlife, nature, and architecture. I’d like a good zoom, and a wide angle. Which lenses are comparable, or better, to the Tamron and Sigma, for about the same price, give or take? I don’t want to go overboard right away, because I’ll be purchasing everything all at once because I do want to have options when I’m traveling. I’ve also read great reviews about the 18-135mm from Canon, and I think I’d be interested in that as well. You can purchase that with the 60D body for $999, which I thought seemed to be a good deal? However, I also read here (I believe) that you’d rather go for the 18-55 paired with the 55-250, as opposed to the 18-135. I’m willing to purchase the lenses and body separately, as opposed to the kit (which comes with a lot of stuff I don’t think I’d necessarily be interested in, such as the bag, etc), I would just like recommendations on which lenses to start off with.

    Your advice is greatly appreciated! Thank you :)

    1. Ashleh,

      First, the 60D and T4i/T5i are both great cameras; I also prefer the 60D, but the T4i does have advantages for video. The T5i, which was just announced today is just a T4i with a new number pasted on it… no new hardware (but there is some new firmware).

      The 50mm lenses are great; they’re inexpensive and great for low-light or shallow depth of field (for portraiture with a blurred background, for example). The 50 f/1.8 is cheap and optically a great lens, though it feels cheap. The 50 f/1.4 has a much better build quality, but its not cheap.

      I don’t recommend any all-in-one zoom lenses like the 18-270, or Canon’s 18-200. Optically, none of them are any good yet. They’re convenient, true… but if that’s your deciding factor, there are plenty of point-and-shoots with a longer zoom range that are also easier to carry around. To reach the long end of the telephoto range, you’d be better off with a lens like Canon’s 70-300 IS USM (not the 75-300).

      The sigma 10-20 isn’t a bad lens; Canon’s is better, but pricey. The best choice is actually the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, which has great optical quality and lets in much more light than the others.

      As for the 18-135:  Canon now makes TWO 18-135mm lenses; the older (USM) model that is sold in a kit with the 60D. Unfortunately, it’s a poor design, optically… I’ve been very disappointed with it, and resolution tests are not flattering. But there’s also the new 18-135 STM, which is optically much improved, and of course, handy for video. I’m not sold on STM motors… I prefer a high-quality Ring-Type USM motor, but they’re usually only found in “L” series lenses.

      – Matthew

  25. I am planning to buy a canon 600d. I am not sure if I should buy it along with 18-55 or with 18-135. I’ll be mainly using it for indoor purposes.

  26. Hi mathew,
    Iam a beginner going to buy the canon t4i with the 18-55 is II kit lens(18-135 stm a bit out of my budget)and would like to get another lens And was thinking about the 50mm 1.8 or the new 40mm 2.8 stm which one do you think would make more sense or do you think i sould consider another lense altogether.
    Thanks
    Gurpal Singh

    1. Hi Gurpal,

      Both lenses have good optical quality, but each has their own benefits. The 50mm f/1.8 is a little less expensive, and it lets in a little more than twice as much light as the 40mm, which makes it helpful when you don’t have a ton of natural light to work with. It also gives you shallower depth of field, which can be helpful for portraits or still-life shots.

      The 40mm STM is obviously more compact, and the quiet motor would make it useful for shooting video, if you do that.

      I’d lean towards the 50mm, but it really depends on your needs. Also, you might want to consider the 85mm f/1.8 for portrait work.

       

  27. Hello Mathew can you suggest me a good 70-300 mm value for money telezoom lense for wild life photography. my budget is around 450$. i use canon t4i along with 18-135 stm. thanks.

    1. Hi Muthu,

      The Tamron 70-300mm VC USD may be the best option for you. It has slightly higher optical quality than the Canon, it’s stabilized, and it’s not too expensive. The Tamron USD AF motor is pretty comparable to the older USM type in the Canon, though neither are as good as the ring-type in the Canon “L” series lens (which costs over $1200).

      – Matthew

  28. Hi there. I know this is really late but I really need advice on which is the better lens.. :)

    -Canon 18-135 STM lens
    or
    -Tamron 18-200 Macro lens

    1. Easily the Canon STM. Much better image quality, even though the zoom range isn’t as big. No point in using an SLR if you’re not going to get better image quality than a point and shoot.

      – Matthew :-)

  29. Hi Matthew,
    I really appreciate the advice you’ve provided others. I’m a hobbyist about to purchase a t4i+18-135 STM. a lot of my current shooting is of my infant daughter, indoors in varying light conditions. Am i right to assume that the 18-135 won’t be enough for indoor/low-light? Should I add the 50/1.8 to my purchase, given the price, or is there a better fast lens I should be ponying up more money for? Thanks so much!

    1. Hi Marc,

      It’s a tough call, actually. With the image stabilization on the 18-135 STM, if you shoot wide open in the middle of the zoom range at f/4, and get 3 stops of stabilization, you get a rough equivalent of shooting of shooting at f/1.4 (or f/2 if you’re shooting at f/5.6).  However, that’s only equivalence in terms of camera shake; if you have subject movement, you’re still much more likely to get blur with the zoom. I’m guessing that for at least a few months, your daughter will be pretty still for a good portion of the time, so you might be able to get away with juts the 18-135. Of course, things will change as she gets older… :)

      Personally, I think it’s worth getting the 50mm f/1.8 for the image quality and shallow depth of field, and the ability to stop action in low light is a big plus. Another good option for use with the T4i would be a 35mm f/2 , which is considerably more expensive (but only in relative terms), but it allows you to be a little closer to your subjects. Also, I love the 85mm f/1.8; it’s an excellent portrait lens… much better than the 50mm, if you have a little more distance to work with. I don’t think there’s any particular reason that you should go for a more expensive lens, though, unless you have a specific use for that lens in mind.

      The only real drawback to the 50mm f/1.8 is that it feels cheap and the focusing motor is a little loud compared to a USM motor. Those things don’t really bother me, most of the time (and it’s much more robust than it feels) but if you think you’d like something that feels a little more professional, the 50mm f/1.4 has a USM motor and a more solid build (plus 2/3 more light wide open, of course). That’s up to you :)

      – Matthew

  30. Hi Matthew,

    I enjoyed reading your replies, so decided to join the forum. I mostly take pics of my toddler kids and also do some outside photography.

    I am planning to buy my first DSLR and decided to go with Canon 60D. On Amazon this comes with a 18-135 lens for $300 extra, but you don’t seem to like this one. The 18-135 STM comes for about $520. Do you think it’s worth spending the extra money.

    Also, do I need to get the 70-300 that comes for $200 on Amazon (with the 60D)? My son is starting to play baseball and soccer, so I am thinking may need this.

    Should I also get a f/1.4 or a f/1.8 for kids pics?

    Appreciate all the help!

    Vinny

     

    1. Hi Vinny,

      You’re right… I don’t like the original 18-135 USM lens, the optical quality really leaves something to be desired. The new STM lens has fixed those optical flaws, and the STM AF motor is an interesting addition. To me it’s worth the extra money, if that’s the zoom range you’re interested in. We shoot with SLRs to get high quality images, after all… and to have a great sensor with poor optics in front of it would really be a waste of the price of the camera.

      I think that everyone should have a large aperture 50mm lens; they’re great for getting shallow depth of field, nice for portraiture, and great in any low-light situation. Both the f/1.8 and f/1.4 are very sharp, but the f/1.4 is faster focusing and has a better build-quality (in addition to providing 2/3rds of a stop more light). I generally would recommend the f/1.8, and if you find that you’re using it a lot, then you can easily sell it and buy the f/1.4. Even if you sell it at half price (and you shouldn’t have to), you’re only going to be losing $50 or so.

      Bill Minton, an editor here, shoots with a 60D and 70-300mm quite a bit, and seems to enjoy it. I personally find that a 70-200mm lens is enough, most of the time. Either way, you will probably want more reach than the 135mm can give you, and the 70-300mm is a good choice.. moderately fast focus, sharp optics for the price range. Make sure that you get the 70-300 IS USM, not the cheaper 75-300, which is a little junky (but cheap).

      I would choose the 70-200 f/4L instead, for sports. It will give you faster autofocus and a sharper images, and twice as much light at the telephoto end of the zoom. It doesn’t have IS, but if you’re shooting sports, you’ll need a shutter speed that’s fast enough to stop the action anyway… and you can use a monopod for stabilization if you need it (the mounting ring is sold separately).

      Hope that helps :)

      – Matthew

      1. Yes, helps a lot. Thank you very much!!

        One last question, for the f1/8, should I get the 50 or the 85? There’s a big price difference.

        Thanks again!

        Vinny

         

        1. The 85mm is a great lens, too. The charm of the 50 f/1.8 is that it’s so cheap, while still giving you a lot of light and great image quality. The 85mm is a great portrait lens (probably better than the 50mm for typical portraits), but you might find that it’s a little bit too long for every-day shooting. It really just depends on what you’re looking for in a lens, and how much you’re willing to spend :)

          – Matt

            1. Hi Matthew,

              I just bought a Canon 60D, but Amazon has a great sale going on with the T4i and the 18-135STM lens for $859. I am thinking of swapping my 60D for a 4i. Any suggestions? I am a beginner and also would use the camera for video recording my kids activities (T4i has auto focus for video).

              Thanks,
              Vinny

  31. Hi Matthew,

    I am planning to purchase my first DSLR and I am totally confused about camera and lens combo. I have interest in photography but I am novice in this now. So I am looking for something of quality but not too complex for a beginner neither too similar to a point n shoot. My budget is $1100. Also I have few questions.
    1. Is there any risk in buying online, I mean in terms of quality of Camera and lenses ?
    2. Canon T3i OR Canon T4i ? How much difference they have?
    3. Cannon 18-55 & 55-250 OR Canon 18-135 ?

    I saw a combo of T3i with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS in $600, 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS in $150 (if taken along with any DSLR). Also do we need less than 18mm lense for macro shoot and close up portrait photography?

    1. Hi Vani,

      The nice thing about any of the major brand SLRs is that they can be as simple or as sophisticated as you want them to be; if you want simplicity at first, you just set the mode dial to “automatic”, and it will work just like a point and shoot. When you’re ready to take more control over your camera, you can switch it over into one of the semi-automatic modes, or full manual control.

      These days, it’s hard to go wrong with an SLR. They’re all very high quality and packed with features; no matter which one you buy, you should be able to take great pictures if you know how to use it. In particular, the Canon T3i and T4i, and 60D are excellent, and Nikon D3200 and D5200 (coming soon) are great choices that won’t be too expensive.

      If you’re talking about buying online in the United States, I wouldn’t hesitate to buy from a reputable seller. Amazon.com is great, especially if you’re a Prime member and can get everything with free 2-Day shipping, but B&H and Adorama, newegg, and several others are also quite good. If you find a camera on some other site that you’ve never heard of, and the price is suspiciously low, it probably is a scam… there are tons of them out there, so be careful.

      Regarding the T3i and T4i, I’ve written an article on the subject, so let me just direct you there.

      Regarding the lenses… it’s really a matter of personal preference, as long as you’re talking about the 18-135 STM lens (not the old 18-135). You’ll get great optical quality with the 18-135 STM, it’s faster focusing, and it’s more convenient, but it won’t have the telephoto reach that the 55-250 has. If you’re also planning on recording video with your camera, the T4i with the 18-135 STM is probably the best bet. I would not recommend the T3i with the old 18-135 kit lens; the optical quality is not up to par. Instead, buy the body with the 18-55 or just the body alone, and get separate lenses to suit your needs.

      For close up/macro photography, you actually don’t need a wide angle lens (shorter than 18mm)… you just need a close focusing lens. Canon makes some very nice ones, but the most popular for the T3i/T4i is the 60mm f/2.8 Macro, which is incredibly sharp, and also a good portrait lens.

      Hope that helps!

      – Matthew

       

      1. Hey Matthew,

        I really appreciate your help. The information was in real detail. I have 2 more question. Should I go for UV protection filter for lens and 3yrs warranty plan ($165) for the T4i ?

        Thanks
        Vani

        1. As a general rule, I don’t recommend using a UV filter. In my experience, they are more likely to cause problems with lens flair and ghosting than they are likely to protect your lens. However, you SHOULD always use a lens hood.

          It depends on the warranty. If you’re talking about a simple extended warranty against manufacturing defects and the like, then no… I wouldn’t buy one. If there’s going to be a problem, chances are the Canon warranty will catch it. However, if you’re talking about accident insurance, then it might be worth it… depending on how rough you expect to be on your equipment. You also need to be honest with yourself, of course, about your ability to keep track of the relevant paperwork, and remember in a couple years that you might be covered. I’ll leave that up to you :)

          – Matthew

  32. Hi Matthew.
    I really enjoyed reading your comments so I go straight to the point. I have a 60D body and 2 lenses 18-55 kit with no IS and a 55-250 IS. As a studio photographer I am afraid that my photos in full-shot (full body shot) don’t have much of a quality I’m looking for. Do the studios use a medium format camera for their full body pictures? if not so why my camera produces so much noise and have low quality.(I know my lighting equipment isn’t much good). I always use 5.6 f and 125 shutter speed and 100, 125 or 200 ISO. Is there anything wrong with my lenses?

    1. Hi E’sa,

      First, let me say welcome to L&M :)

      This is a good question, and I can really only give you guesses without seeing one of your RAW files. Your lens should not be contributing directly to any noise in your image, but it’s always possible that there’s an element out of alignment that’s reducing image quality… that’s not hard to rule out, though. Many, many studio photographers shoot with 35mm format cameras, and some with APS-C, so that should not be a problem in itself.

      Usually, when someone is having noise problems at low ISO (like 100-200), it’s because they’re systematically under-exposing their images. If you shoot at 200 but then increase the exposure in Lightroom/Photoshop by 1 stop, it’s the same as shooting at ISO400, but worse… you’ll get more noise than actually shooting at 400, and it’s much worse if you shoot JPG.

      If you’d like, you can email me or upload a RAW (or original JPG) file or two, and I’d be happy to take a look and give you my opinion on the causes. There’s a “File Upload” box at the very bottom of the right column —>

      – Matthew

      1. Thanks for your reply and I appreciate your warm welcoming. I just uploaded img_0032.jpg file. Please take a look at it and let me know the problems. Except posing and lighting :). I did not get the photo. That’s my studio. I do not have professional lighting equipment and that’s the reason I’m asking if there is anything wrong. I will buy new stuff after our new years holiday’s next year. I’m Iranian by the way. That’ll be on March.

        P.S. When I get the photos, it’s the same:)

         

         

  33. Hi Matt please let me know which of the following is right choice:
    rebel t4i along with
    1. canon 18-135 stm kit lense+ tamaron 70-300 vc usm
    2. canon 18-135 stm kit lense+ canon 55-250 IS II
    3. Sigma 18-250 Macro OS HSM
    Please keep in mind i am an amateur and mostly shoot while in travel along with my family and at free time. want to develop photography as my hobby. kindly help me.

    1. Hi Mani,

      For me, it’s a toss-up between options #1 and #2, but I’d probably lean towards the Tamron 70-300 simply because of the fact that it uses a USM (USD) motor and it will give you a little extra reach. However, both lenses are optically quite good in their price classes, so you can buy either with confidence.The T4i with 18-135 STM is an excellent base, in both cases.

      I would not consider the Sigma 18-250. It may offer convenience, but the image quality is not up to snuff; you might as well use a point and shoot instead.

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

      1. Thanks Matty for the kind advise. With the t4i + 18-135 STM kit which option I can go for
        1. Tamaron 70-300 VC usd
        2. Canon 70-300 IS USM
        Can u help me

        Mani

        1. Again, both lenses are very nice… and they’re almost identical, optically. The Tamron has slightly higher center resolution than the Canon at 300mm, but it’s not as even across the image…. the borders are slightly lower res (but still very high). The optical differences between the two are probably not going to be field relevant… even in lab tests, the differences are minimal.

          The Canon’s USM motor on this particular lens is not very fast… it’s much more like a conventional motor. The Tamron is actually faster, which is rare… usually a true Canon USM will out-perform anything else.

          So, again, I’d lean towards the Tamron, but both are good lenses.

          – Matthew

  34. Hi Matthew,

    Quick question. I am looking at buying the Canon T3i and the EF-S 18-135 IS STM lens. I have read that one of the major improvments to this lens has to do with the continuous AF for video – a feature of the T4i. I hear the lens is really good for my price range but… My question is, will I be wasting my money on this lens since I will be buying the T3i and not using all its features?

    Thank you,

    Chris

    1. Hi Chris,

      I’m a big fan on the 18-135 STM lens, but for me, it’s because of the improved image quality over the old 18-135, which was really sub-par for a Canon lens. The STM on the new lens is nice and quiet and pretty fast, though it doesn’t seem any faster than a USM motor, to me.

      Certainly the lens was designed with video in mind, since a quiet lens is so important for video… but the same features are also good for photography in general. More importantly, though, is that there really isn’t another good option in this zoom range, period (including Sigma, Tamron, etc). You can get better performance in 17-55 zooms, and in 70-200 zooms, but the old Canon 18-135 is pretty bad, and the 18-200 is even worse… so the STM lens really is your best bet unless you want to go with multiple lenses or a different zoom range.

      – Matthew

  35. Hi Matt,

    I’m looking to purchase my first DSLR camera to go travelling. We are going to Europe in winter and i’d like a versatile lens that i could use indoors and outdoors for portraits, scenery, building shots etc. Am tossing between Canon 650D, 600D and the Nikon D5100. Am leaning towards 650D with the 18-135mm STM lens, as it seems the most versatile. Do you think in general that would offer enough zoom in a pinch? Or which camera/lens combo would you recommend?

    We are also going to Norway to (hopefully) view the Northern Lights. Would i require a separate other lens to shoot this, or could the all round lens i’m searching for do this in any way? The more i read, the more i get confused, so any help would be greatly appreciated! (P.S. budget is around $1000 if possible!)

    1. Hi Marc,

      I think that the 18-135 STM lens is an almost perfect walk-around lens for Canon. The 135mm end of the zoom is equivalent to roughly 216mm on a full frame camera, and a 200mm (on full frame) is the longest lens that most photojournalists carry for day-to-day work. Unless you anticipate shooting wildlife or some other event from a distance, the 135mm should be just fine. Keep in mind that it won’t be ideal in low light; for that you’d need to spend more money on an f/2.8 lens (or larger aperture), but that will dramatically increase the weight of you camera and the cost.

      So, the 650D / T4i with the 18-135mm would be a great option, and buying it as a kit is less expensive than buying the 600D/T3i body with a separate 18-135 STM.

      I should also mention that Nikon recently announced the D5200 on the European market, though it’s not available in the USA yet. It looks like it will be a great camera, but Nikon doesn’t have an 18-135mm VR lens, and they discontinued their excellent 18-135 non-VR model.

      – Matthew

      1. Hi Matthew,

        Thanks heaps for that, i’m definitely leaning towards the 650D & 18-135 STM Lens combo. Seems i will be able to use it in most situations. The D5200 is very intriguing but as its only getting a release ‘sometime in December’ i won’t have much time at all to become familiar with it before we leave just before Christmas.

        The only thing that worries me about that lens is that i might struggle to take photographs of the Northern lights while we are there using only the 18-135mm. Would that take ‘decent’ enough photos or is it worth spending money for a second faster lens that could do it more justice? This really is difficult for me to get my head around unfortunately. Would something like this do a decent job perhaps, or would i require a better lens or maybe a wider angle lens? http://www.canon.com.au/For-You/Camera-Lenses/EF50mm-f18-II-Lens

        Any and all help is greatly appreciated!

        1. Hi Mark,

          For shooting the Northern Lights (assuming that you have a tripod… you’ll need one regardless), you shouldn’t have any trouble with the STM lens. You’ll most likely be using it at the wide end of the zoom range, giving you an f/3.5, which isn’t too bad… and an exposure time of anywhere from 5 – 30 seconds, depending on the ISO you choose.

          A 50mm f/1.8 would be a great lens to add to your collection, it’s great for portraits and low-light work in general, but it’s not the greatest focal length for shooting the night sky; wide angle is really the way to go there… and getting a large aperture wide angle lens would nearly double (or possibly triple) your cost.

          Last week I photographed the night sky, and the Milky Way was visible (which is hard, here in Florida), and I used an f/2.8 lens at ISO400, 15 second exposure… and the northern lights are much brighter than the Milky Way, though I haven’t seen them since I was a kid.

          Your lens at f/3.5 is only lets in a half-stop less light, so you’d be fine. Again… you’ll need a tripod :)

          – Matthew

          1. Thank Matt,

            I really appreciate your information. In this short time you’ve been 1000x more helpful than any camera store i have been to. I think the 18-135mm lens will suit my needs more than enough!

            I plan on getting a small tripod to travel, something like http://www.camera-warehouse.com.au/joby-gorillapod-slr-zoom for example. Will take up next to no room while also giving me a stable platform from which to shoot.

            Again, i cannot thank you enough, you’re a champion!

            1. Glad to be able to help. FWIW, you might want to go to a store and hold a gorillapod in your hand before you buy one; they’re remarkably heavy for their size.

              Good luck!

              – Matthew

  36. Hi Matt, Please suggest a good 18-200 mm lens for my canon rebel xsi. I want a lens which will not break the bank but can produce sharp images. I am looking for this lens because I don’t want to carry 2 lenses(18-55 & 70-200) and keep changing them on the camera. Appreciate your suggestion. Thanks.

    1. Hi Elango,

      Unfortunately, at the moment there really are no good 18-200 lenses. There are plenty of lenses in that range (and larger) but they all suffer from serious optical flaws at part or all of the zoom range. I own a Nikon 18-200 VR lens (I shoot Nikon and Canon, though mostly Canon now), which is a little better than Canon’s, but it has still ruined some of my photos that would otherwise have been very nice.

      I would suggest getting Canon’s new  EF-S 18-135 STM (not the old 18-135). With a camera like your XSi, the 135mm zoom end will be equivalent to a 216mm lens on a full frame, 35mm sized sensor. It’s a little expensive, but the optical quality is great throughout the zoom range, and it’s also smooth, quiet, and fast focusing.

      Otherwise, you can go with any old 18-200 (with image stabilization), and just expect that not everything is going to be tack sharp… especially away from the center of the frame. You can make up for that a little bit by stopping down the aperture by a stop or two, but mostly, you’ll have to concede that you’re giving up a little performance for convenience.

      Good luck!

      – Matthew

  37. I am buying a d3200 over the 5100. ND I don’t know if I should just get the kit lens, or just the body with a 300$ lens budget. Is there a better lens than the kit for that price? image stability is importnat to me but I don’t know if AF is better. And i would prefer the lowest mm possible. so I guess 16-55 or something to that degree. Please help me out so I dont stay up the better half of my life trying to figure this out.

    1. Hi Chris,

      If I’m not mistaken, the D3200 is only sold in a kit… so if you’re thinking of buying one as a body-only, make sure that it’s not used/refurbished or a scam. Some places will try to sell the body alone for really cheap, but when you place the order online, they call you up and try to give you a hard sell on the lens to get the price back up to normal.

      Anyway, the kit lens (18-55mm) isn’t too bad. There are lots of great wide angle zooms that would be wider and better, but it really depends on your budget. I’m a big fan of the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 II and the Sigma 10-20 for wide angle zooms. If you want a more wide to mid type of zoom, the Nikon 16-85mm might be a good choice, though I’ve never used it myself. Sigma also makes a great 17-50 f/2.8 and a 17-70 f/2.8-4.

      – Matthew

      1. I don’t think I could afford 500-900 on a lens right now. not unless I wait a long time, which by then im sure there will be a better camera that is as helpful as the 3200 is. I feel like I will end up just getting the kit. Which dont have too much of a problem with, I just feel like I could use the extra 3-400$ to get a lens that is similar but better. I was looking at the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM. But half those letters I dont even know what they mean. But if you could suggest a lens that is as much as 420$, I would greatly appreciate it.

        1. Hi Chris,

          Just so you know… in the Sigma lens, the OS means Optical Stabilization, (basically the same as VR in a Nikon lens) so getting sharp images in low light is easier, the HSM means “high speed motor”, so it is faster focusing (and usually more quiet) than with a standard lens (like Nikon’s “Silent Wave Motor”), and the DC just means that it won’t work on full-size sensor cameras (ie, D600, D800, D4).

          The Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM might be a good option, though it’s just a bit out of your budget at $469. That would give you a wider zoom range and better performance in low light than the kit lens, plus some (limited) macro / close-up abilities.

          The only other lens I can think of that makes sense would be the Nikon 18-105 f/3.5-5.6 VR. It also has image stabilization, has an even longer zoom range than the Sigma, and costs about $399. Optically, its pretty strong… maybe a little less sharp when zoomed out all the way to 105, but for the price, it’s a nice lens.

          Good luck!

          – Matthew

  38. Hi Matthew,

    I found your page and it is really fantastic, so I’m hoping you can offer some advise. I’m looking to upgrade my fairly ancient Canon A-1 film camera. It’s become impossible for me to find a good dark room to develop photos. I’m looking into the T3i and was hoping you could answer a few lens questions. There are two lens kits: 18-55mm or 18-135mm (for 200$ more). I would like to use them for scenery and head-shot photos that would require minimal re-touching via photoshop. (at least until I’m more familiar with the program).

    I am also debating a discount they are offering with an additional $300 with a Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS.

    I’m willing to get two lenses that would serve a variety of purposes, but don’t want to sacrifice too much on quality of image and won’t want to go much higher in cost (400$) for an additional lens.

    Be well,

    Kevin

    1. Hi Kevin,

      I used to shoot with the Canon A-1 myself, up until 1993, when it was stolen (though I had also purchased my first EOS cameras, too). I did my own darkroom work, though, which I always enjoyed… though I’ve given it up now.

      The 18-55mm is a good lens, and since it covers a decent wide-angle range, I think it’s a good lens to get. The 18-135 (old style) is not such a great lens. Optically, the quality is shoddy. However, the new 18-135 STM version of the lens (significantly more expensive) is supposed to be much better optically… but I still haven’t had a chance to play with one yet.

      The 70-300 IS USM is also a great lens, though the 300mm reach is probably more than you’ll really need, but if it makes sense for you financially, I do recommend it. You might also consider the Canon 85mm f/1.8, which is an excellent portrait lens and is not outrageously expensive. It has the great optical quality you’d expect from a prime lens, and the nice shallow depth of field from the large aperture; you’ll find that it’s harder to get shallow depth of field with the smaller (than film) sensor of the T3i.

      – Matthew

      1. Hi Matthew,

        Thank you so much for your response. It has certainly helped me narrow down my ideas. I have one final question before I pull the trigger on my purchase. I found another package that offers this:

        Standard kit with Canon EF-S 18-55mm IS II Lens and Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II Lens

        There is an offer price for an additional 300$ for the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens.

        And I’m going to purchase the Canon Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens to have something more convenient for portrait and in the lower price range.

        Do you feel the additional 70-300 is a necessary purchase at this price point given the included telephoto in the kit? My hesitance is that it is a great lens for the price.

        Be well,

        Kevin

        1. Hi Kevin,

          The 55-250 is a good lens, optically, but the 70-300 covers a very similar range, and is a better lens all-around (better glass, better focusing motor, etc). It wouldn’t really make sense to buy both of them.

          If you go for this T3i package with the 18-55, you still get $250 off the price of the 70-300mm, too. That might be the way to go. The 50mm f/1.8 is a nice little lens; everyone should have one :)

          – Matthew

      2. Hello Matthew,

        Great responses and if I could ask for some of your working knowledge please.

        I takes pictures for my web site that covers football here in SW Ohio, I am a working amateur that is getting better each season with 2012 being my 3rd. I shoot a 60D (simple love the features) which is a huge upgraded from the Rebel that is now my daughters. I am looking at making another purchase and the 7D seems to be one that ranks very nicely but on the fence as to maybe something better will come out in 2013?

        My question for you is I have 2 lenses, Tamron SP 17-50mm F/2.8 for end zone/profile shots and Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 which I simple love for low light shooting in some HS venues. I need a little more distance (in my 50’s don’t move as quickly) at times, I do not want to compromise the F/2.8 but need something a little more powerful. Is their a camera that will fill my needs for action football shot’s along with getting a little more reach? Or is my option to use a 2X tele converter? Will the converter change the photo’s? If I step up to the 7D will the lenses I use on the 60D become obsolete?

        Apprecaite you taking any time to answer my questions Sir,

        Scott

        http://www.swohfootball.com

        1. Hi Scott,

          I studied photojournalism in SE Ohio (OU), and used to enjoy weekend trips over to Cincinnati. :)

          First, the lenses that you have now will work on the 7D (or any other APS-C sensor Canon). The 70-200 will work on ANY Canon EOS camera.  So keep that in mind if you decide to get a new body.

          If you need more reach but still need a large aperture, unfortunately, the only real option is to buy a bigger telephoto lens… like a 300mm f/2.8 or 400mm f/2.8, and I’m sure you’ll find the price to be a little hard to swallow (the Sigma 300mm is quite a bit less expensive).

          If you use a 2x teleconverter on your current lens (assuming that it’s compatible), there are two problems: first, you lose 2 stops of light, so it becomes an f/5.6 lens instead of a f/2.8. second, it slows down the auto-focus speed, so it’s harder to take action photos.

          You may be able to find a used 300mm f/2.8 for a reasonable price, if you keep your eye on craigslist and ebay, but I’m afraid that’s the best I can offer.  Alternately, you could buy a Canon 300mm f/4L lens, which is only one stop less light but a lot less expensive ($1300), which would give you great optical performance and AF speed, and you’d only have to bump up your ISO one additional stop, or you could split it between your ISO and shutterspeed.

          As for camera bodies, the 7D is awesome. The only thing that will really improve it is better high-ISO performance. I don’t have any idea what Canon is going to release in the next year, but I’m expecting one or two announcements in September before Photokina. You might make due with the camera you have until then.

          Good luck!

          – Matthew

          PS – On your website, you might want to make a minor change to your CSS. The background image should be set to repeat on the X axis. On a large, widescreen monitor, it doesn’t reach the edges of the screen :)

          1. Matt,
            Thanks for the reply and the great advise.
            Sorry the the delay but I have been busy covering 26 HS football games in 4 weeks along with Michigan State’s home opener vs. Boise State.
            All the greta lighting at MSU made light a non factor but I needed the zoom so I am looking at the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L for just over 1,500 dollars which will allow me in crowded venues like the OSU vs. MSU game next weekend.
            Or would my option of the EF 70-300mmf/4-5.6L be a better option @ $1,400…..I have just under 4K to spend on another outfit! so I have options Matt….just not sure what will suffice! I was leaning towards the 7D so I can swap lenses in case something happens to a camera while covering a game.
            I have been instructed to buy the mark5 II or better for this lenses and wanted to ask you, money is not a problem for this 2nd camera. I will use the 60 for end zone and close ups with my 17-50mm f/2.8 lenses but will upgrade after the season to a 28-70 or 100mm range to cover everything on the field. I shoot around the new guys and Max Preps so I am in envy of the rigs but have the remind myself it is for 24-36 key action shots and the profiles for the players that colleges coaches access. I hope to have a 3 times a year publication via down loading so the better the picture the more intriguing to the fan!
            Thanks for the advise Matt and good items in Ohio…..I am originally from between Lake Tahoe and Sacramento.
            Take care and thanks again for the advice!
            Scott

  39. Thanks Matthew, about your comments on canon 18-200 mm IS lens. Since I am beginner of DSLR camera and I have canon 60D, I need your suggestion on lenses. Can you pls give me the suggestions which Canon lenses will be best – the range between 15 mm to 300 mm? If I buy two lenses, which two lenses? And if I buy which three lenses, which three lenses. Not prefer “L “lenses, because those are very expensive and I am not using for professional purposes. Some one suggested me Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM and Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM.

    But I need to know from you..
    Thanks

    1. Hi Jamal,

      There are lots of good lens combinations to cover that range, and again, it really depends on what you’ll be using them for. But the suggestion of the 70-300mm f/4 -5.6 IS USM is a good one. I personally would take a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 IS HSM instead of the Canon 15-85, because I need the low-light capabilities of the f/2.8 lens, but they’re both good lenses, so you can pick the one that better suits your needs.

      – Matthew

    1. When it comes to optical quality, this lens (and the Nikon version) are pretty bad… and the Sigma version is too. Honestly, this is just the problem with trying to pack a huge zoom range into a single lens; it’s convenient, but the image quality just isn’t very good.

      Lens choice always depends on what you expect to do with it :) What will you be using it for?

      – Matthew

  40. How are these lense. I have canon T3i. Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM and Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM. Pls let me know

    1. Hi Jamal

      They’re both good lenses, but to me, the optical quality of the 15-85 doesn’t justify it’s price, especially as an f/5.6 lens. It’s good, though… just not great. If I’m not mistaken, it was sharper at the lower end of the zoom range, softening up as it zooms out beyond 50 or 60mm. I probably would feel better about the lens if it were a 15-50mm, and it can be used that way, so perhaps I’m being a little hard on it. Still, I think that for $700 I’d rather have an f/2.8 for that range and lose 2mm, like with a Canon 17-55, or the much more reasonably priced Sigma 17-50 or Tamron 17-50.

      The 70-300, again is a great quality lens, optically, though it feels a little cheap. It’s a USM, so it focuses fast and has IS, but the f/5.6 make it less than ideal for anything fast-moving in low light, so it really depends on what you want to shoot with it. If low light is important to you, the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is relatively inexpensive.

      – Matthew

    2. Thanks Matthew for your valuable comments on Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM and Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4-5.6-IS-USM.

      What is your best suggestion for me to buy lenses? I would like to buy tow lenses between the ranges from 15/18mm to 300mm for my T3i camera. I am not professional and beginner of using SLR camera. Purpose is only capture family photo, portrait of my daughters, party and travel photo. That’s all.

      Please reply.

      Many thanks, Jamal
      Jamal

      1. Jamal,

        I’d recommend the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 (always use the lens hood that comes with it), and the Canon 70-300mm. That will cover the full range with high quality optics, and very good low-light performance in the 17-50mm range, too. The 70-300 won’t be perfect for low-light action photography, but it will be great for travel and wildlife, and family photos in general.

        – Matthew

  41. I am wanting to take some pictures outside of scenery and some outside portraits. I already have the 50mm lense. I am refreshing my photo skills and would like to know what you would suggest for a good outdoor lense. Not too cheap of a lense but not the most expensive. I have the Canon T3i
    Any ideas?
    Thanks,
    Taegan

    1. The portrait lens is not too tough… whether you’re shooting indoors or out, an 85mm lens with a large aperture is a good choice. Canon’s 85mm f/1.8 is a nice lens, and not outrageously expensive at [aprice asin=”B00007GQLU”]. Similarly, Sigma’s 85mm f/1.4 can give you even shallower depth of field, but it costs twice as much.

      The landscape lens is a little more tricky, since you can take great shots with about any focal length…. what’s most important is optical quality (and of course, your shooting technique) and finding a lens that matches your personal style. A lot of landscape photogaphers shoot wide angle… in fact, ultra-wide angle is very popular. Others shoot mainly with telephotos.

      Assuming, though, that you’re like most landscape photographers, and like to compose with a strong foreground element, then I can recommend something in the 10-22mm range. Sigma’s 10-20 is not too expensive, and is optically quite good (for the type of lens it is)… optically, it’s about on par with Canon’s 10-22. I prefer the Tokina 11-16, but that’s only because I shoot events with it and need the f/2.8.

      – Matthew

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *