Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hi all...I have a canon xsi, pretty to new to photogaphy. I can't decide between the 55-250mm or the 28-135 lenses. It would be for various styles, i.e sports, portraits, nite shots.

Thoughts?

Thanks

oh, (no offence, but) here we go again. . .

What's your budget?

What do you already have?

Why not choose the EF 70-200

Sorry for the vagueness..
I have the kit lens, 18-55.

Budget is around $400 for now, since I'm a newbie. Mostly scenic and sports pics. The 200mm is close to $1k, no?

Umm...bit higher.

IMO the 28-135mm is much better for starters. Acceptable faults for the price it's a better bang for your buck. Below 50mm you have wide capabilities, above that you have the reach.

Get a feel for the kind of shots you like then you can always upgrade to superior when you sense your need surpasses what the lens can give you.

Hope this helps and welcome to the forums.


Randy

lol Mike... Recent conversation about the same thing. Take a look cuz the replies you'll get will pretty much be the same.

http://www.tpmg.ca/forum/viewtopic.php?t=14217

I always suggest the nifety fifty as the second lens to get for noobies.
Why? It costs $120 new and even cheaper in the used market.

Get it. Promise you won't regret it.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/can ... p8_ii_c16/

As between the two you are considering, I would pick the 28-135 - a wide range with decent quality and very affordable.

You may wish to check out the-digital-picture website which has reviews of Canon lenses as well as sample images:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi ... eview.aspx

It is good advice to consider a prime lens as well/ as an alternative to the zoom, (though the 50 1.8 drives me nuts because of the too small focus ring - I would go with the 50 1.4 if I was looking for a 50mm). However, you might be best to use a general purpose zoom first to see what your most used focal length is before picking up a particular prime.

A bit off topic, but if you are doing a lot of night shots, you should pick up a sturdy tripod if you don't already have one.

Good luck!

Why not spring for a bit more $$ and get the 18-200? You can get $50-$100 for your 18-55 depending on its flavour (IS or non-IS), which would help make up some of the difference from your current budget.

a few thoughts... 18-200 gives plenty of distortion in both ends.. which for the short range can be interesting if you like taking artsy stuff... which I do, but not everyone does.

I have 18-55 IS and the 55-250 IS. the 55-250 isn't bad. I wish it wasn't as soft in the long end, but the IS is pretty good and the range suits my purposes well enough. When I have the money I'll upgrade to any L series lens in a heartbeat, but for a starting lens before you have a clue what you're doing, the 55-250 isnt bad.

BTW, you can pick them up used at henrys with warranty pretty cheap - I think I got mine for $230 after tax with a 2 yr warranty.

-Stu

For sports photography you won't get any results you'll be happy with with a 'cheap' lens. I have the 55-250 IS and it's a good paperweight, but it's a mediocre lens.
I have an XSi, and I've gone through a half dozen lenses (kit, 55-250, 50 1.8, 50 1.4, 17-40L, 100 macro), I still own 4 of the 6. I STRONGLY recommend the 50 1.8. I know it's probably not the length you're looking for, but the low light ability of the lens is awesome. Get the lens, turn OFF your pop-up flash and I promise you, you wont regret the $120 purchase.

Sports photography is a demanding field. For the rest you can be happy with the current set.

Bobguy, I had asked the same question you did a few weeks back ago and had a great response from the group. (Thanks to all of you)
The best advice I found was use your current lens and see what you are missing out on , get used to the tools you have and when the time comes to purchase the new lens you , yourself will know what you need and what you are looking for.

I've had some decent luck with my 55-250 for taking sports shots, BUT in all fairness I do so with a lot of light. Took hockey pics in an arena with 3 flashes set up around an end, and they came out awesome, but it simply would NOT perform well in dim situations for fast shots... save your money for a good f2.8 lens if you want sports.

Bingo.