Canon Community Canon Community
 


Reply
Respected Contributor
Posts: 1,616
Registered: ‎02-26-2015

Re: photography on a budget...

[ Edited ]

Waddizzle wrote:

The EF-S 18-135mm IS STM is a really great lens.  It duplicates part of the range of the 18-55mm lens that should have been part of your camera kit.  If you are on a budget, investing in a lens that duplicates a range of focal lengths that you can already cover with another lens that you already own may be such a good idea.  It's not like the 18-135mm is faster than your 18-55mm lens.

 


The kit lens that comes with the T6 is the non-STM version of the EF-S 18-55 IS.

 

The EF-S 18-135 IS STM will have better image quality.

 

And actually it is faster, since it doesn't reach the maximum aperture of f/5.6 until the lens is zoomed to 76mm, and is still f/5 at 55mm where the EF-S 18-55 IS he has is f/5.6 from 47mm to 55mm.

 

Aperture Max by Focal Length

18-23mm = f/3.5
24-34mm = f/4.0
35-49mm = f/4.5
50-75mm = f/5.0
76-135mm = f/5.6

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,560
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: photography on a budget...


TTMartin wrote:

Waddizzle wrote:

The EF-S 18-135mm IS STM is a really great lens.  It duplicates part of the range of the 18-55mm lens that should have been part of your camera kit.  If you are on a budget, investing in a lens that duplicates a range of focal lengths that you can already cover with another lens that you already own may [not] be such a good idea.  It's not like the 18-135mm is faster than your 18-55mm lens.

 


The kit lens that comes with the T6 is the non-STM version of the EF-S 18-55 IS.

 

The EF-S 18-135 IS STM will have better image quality.

 

And actually it is faster, since it doesn't reach the maximum aperture of f/5.6 until the lens is zoomed to 76mm, and is still f/5 at 55mm where the EF-S 18-55 IS he has is f/5.6 from 47mm to 55mm.

 

Aperture Max by Focal Length

18-23mm = f/3.5
24-34mm = f/4.0
35-49mm = f/4.5
50-75mm = f/5.0
76-135mm = f/5.6


Oh, wow.  The difference is f/5.0 versus f/5.6.  Do you realize how meaningless those numbers actually are?

 

Did your research compensate for light that is lost due to the increased number of lens elements inside of the 18-135mm lens?  Of course, not.  Comparing aperture values is totally meaningless.  A more substantive comparison would be T values, like cineme lenses, not f values.   

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Respected Contributor
Posts: 1,616
Registered: ‎02-26-2015

Re: photography on a budget...

[ Edited ]

Waddizzle wrote:
Did your research compensate for light that is lost due to the increased number of lens elements inside of the 18-135mm lens?  Of course, not.  Comparing aperture values is totally meaningless.  A more substantive comparison would be T values, like cineme lenses, not f values.   

I'm guessing you didn't research T-Stops since the EF-S 18-135 IS STM and the EF 24-105 f/4L IS have the same 5.1 T-Stop at 50mm, OUCH.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,560
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: photography on a budget...


TTMartin wrote:

Waddizzle wrote:
Did your research compensate for light that is lost due to the increased number of lens elements inside of the 18-135mm lens?  Of course, not.  Comparing aperture values is totally meaningless.  A more substantive comparison would be T values, like cineme lenses, not f values.   

I'm guessing you didn't research T-Stops since the EF-S 18-135 IS STM and the EF 24-105 f/4L IS have the same 5.1 T-Stop at 50mm, OUCH.


There you go again.  Changing the subject.  You've switched from the EF-S 18-55 IS.lens to the EF 24-105 f/4L.  More meaningless facts, which have nothing to do with your original claim that anyone can handhold a camera for a full second.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Respected Contributor
Posts: 1,616
Registered: ‎02-26-2015

Re: photography on a budget...

[ Edited ]

Waddizzle wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

Waddizzle wrote:
Did your research compensate for light that is lost due to the increased number of lens elements inside of the 18-135mm lens?  Of course, not.  Comparing aperture values is totally meaningless.  A more substantive comparison would be T values, like cineme lenses, not f values.   

I'm guessing you didn't research T-Stops since the EF-S 18-135 IS STM and the EF 24-105 f/4L IS have the same 5.1 T-Stop at 50mm, OUCH.


There you go again.  Changing the subject.  You've switched from the EF-S 18-55 IS.lens to the EF 24-105 f/4L.  More meaningless facts, which have nothing to do with your original claim that anyone can handhold a camera for a full second.


Ok here is the TStop comparison of the EF-S 18-55 (red) and the EF-S 18-135 (blue). Yep, as I said before you didn't research TStops, and were just spewing nonsense.  The EF-S 18-135 is faster using f/stops or TStops.

 

tstop.JPG

Once again, sorry if the facts conflict with your opinions.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 4,560
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: photography on a budget...

[ Edited ]

"Ok here is the TStop comparison of the EF-S 18-55 (red) and the EF-S 18-135 (blue). Yep, as I said before you didn't research TStops, and were just spewing nonsense.  The EF-S 18-135 is faster using f/stops or TStops."

 

Wow.  More meaningless facts.  The differences in aperture settings are almost smaller than what the camera can set across most of the zoom range.

 

The OP is on a budget.  Have you lost sight of that fact.  I think you have.  The EF-S 18-135mm is a great lens.  I have no idea what you're arguing about, but it seem seems to be similar to an air guitar.  The 18-135 is a good lens, but it ain't a budget lens.  Go research that word, "budget".  

 

IMHO, I don't think the OP needs to invest in a lens at this time.  The OP seems to me to be at the "OOH.  OOH.  stage"  [sorry]  That's the best time to spend money on stuff that you really won't need in the future.  You're better off saving your money, and learning more about your gear and photography, in general. 

 

If you need to ask "what should I buy", then you need to learn more about your gear and photography.  Go out there and shoot photos, and learn what works for you, and what does not. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I don't rent software. I use Photoshop CS6, ACR 9.8 and Lightroom 6.8 ."
Super Contributor
Posts: 130
Registered: ‎01-31-2017

Re: photography on a budget...


mrc1703 wrote:

... they are almost 1000 dollars that's expensive for a beginner...Are used lenses a good idea and where can you buy a good used lens? Any help will be appreciated..


As a beginner myself, I say forget the additional lens right now. You don't even know what you want. Learn DSLR photography and make the best use of what you have with your T6 kit. Go out and shoot! You will be amazed to discover how much you have to learn regarding basic composition, learning about the exposure triangle and how to manipulate it to achive varying results, how to adjust and understand camera controls that you might have no clue about right now and learning a bit about post processing. Think about a lens 6 months or a year from now, if you are still interested. You will have plenty to keep you busy until then, IMHO.

 

Look, if you are a beginning violinist, someone can hand you a Stradivarius and if you're a normal player, you're still going to sound like crap until you study and practice. You don't need a Strad to learn music or a $1000 lens to learn about photography. YMMV.

 

 

 

Super Contributor
Posts: 130
Registered: ‎01-31-2017

Re: photography on a budget...


Waddizzle wrote:

 

IMHO, I don't think the OP needs to invest in a lens at this time.  The OP seems to me to be at the "OOH.  OOH.  stage"  [sorry]  That's the best time to spend money on stuff that you really won't need in the future.  You're better off saving your money, and learning more about your gear and photography, in general. 

 

If you need to ask "what should I buy", then you need to learn more about your gear and photography.  Go out there and shoot photos, and learn what works for you, and what does not. 


You have it right. The OP is here because some guy at work told him he should have a 24-105mm lens. To the OP's credit he is asking for help and you've given him the best advice possible. 

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 2,076
Registered: ‎11-14-2012

Re: photography on a budget...

I'll add that the OP hasn't asked about video or if they did I can't find that in this thread. First mention of video is message 17 the way I'm reading it.

"A skill is developed through constant practice with a passion to improve, not bought."
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 3,970
Registered: ‎11-13-2012

Re: photography on a budget...

There was a different thread by the same OP where he asked about video.
John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X, Rebel T5i, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, MX472
powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement