I would like to replace my kit lens with a more quality zoom, but I can't decide whether to buy something like Tamron 17-50mm, Sigma 17-70mm or Canon 28-135mm (which are in my price range) or save up for something like the EF 24-105mm f/4 L lens. I want a lens that I will never have to replace, so the weather sealed, robustly built and high quality L lens makes sense... except, even the used ones are pretty pricey... Also, I'm very much an amateur photographer, so to invest that much money into an expensive lens does not seem entirely justified...
I don't know, I will see. In the mean time, I bought the cheap, fast and sharp EF 50mm f/1.8 II (it's really cheap!), it arrived today. I took it out for a walk, but as you can see from the above photo, it got dark and I haven't managed to take many photos. Tomorrow, however, I have a day off, so hopefully I'll manage to take some interesting shots.
5 comments
Well, if there's any purchase that could be justified, it would be a lens that would stand you in good stead for years to come. It's a better long term investment than a lens that doesn't satisfy you now, and you know you'll want to replace at some point anyway, making the whole thing more expensive in the end. Whatever you buy, you have to live with. Think carefully about which focal lengths will work the best for your needs before you decide.
so glad you got the 50mm :) i have the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which i bought about 2.5 years ago for around $800 AUD. it is my favourite lens and i hardly ever take it off my body. the canon equivalent to this lens is significantly cheaper and when i bought it the shop assistant assured me i would not notice the price difference's amount of quality. it's a bit of a noisy lens but it produces beautiful results and it was within my budget. definitely do LOTS of research, look up flickr groups for the lens for sample images on different cameras. there is so much useful information on the internet! :)
sorry, i meant the canon equivalent is significantly more expensive (more than double i believe!)
Katie, I've also heard many good things about the quality of the Tamron, it is currently very high on my list of desirable lenses. The only reason why I'm not completely won over by it is the fact it has a similar focal range as my kit lens, and I would like something a bit longer...
@Michael, you're right, if it's going to be an investment that will last for a long time, it is justified. However, like you also point out, the issue of the focal range also needs to be taken into account, and the truth is that 24mm is not at all wide on my EOS 350D, so I would also have to buy a wide angle lens, which is another investment... (then again, I'll have to buy another lens if I chose any of the less expensive zooms, as neither has a focal range that will satisfy all my needs). Admittedly, the 24-105mm and a wide angle lens, combined with the 50mm prime, would then cover a very wide focal range and statisfy more or less all my needs, likely for a very long time.
On the other hand, there's the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6, which is very attractive both in terms of its focal range and its price (and, based on the reviews, the image quality is great). But it's an EF-S lens, which means that if I decide to switch to a full frame camera in a few years time (might not happen but who knows), I won't be able to use it...
Bah, so many choices, so many lenses, and so little money to buy everything I would like :D
Anyway, I've decided to postpone the decision until I can be sure I won't regret or have second thoughts about my purchase (and until I've saved up enough money :D)...
Save money for the 24-70 2.8 L lens, its worth it (if you have an wide angle lens which covers 20-28mm equivalent). I have never regret buying this master piece :)
thank you for taking the time to comment.