would it be good to buy a 18-135mm F3.5-5.6) IS and a 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS both for my Canon 70D?

[mauriciocayo]

would it be good to buy a 18-135mm F3.5-5.6) IS + a 70-300mm F4-5.6 IS both for my Canon 70D? 

Or a 18-135mm F3.5-5.6) IS + a 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS STM?

Or with a 70-200? but then budget increases too much.

what do you recommend me? i want to have fun soooon taking pictures toi animals in Sri Lanka. Later i would pick a macro to take photo to insects when i do bike trails and also the Telescopic that i should choose.

[ebiggs1 · Accepted solution]

The lenses you mentioned are fine, actually very good, for the vast majority of amature photograhpers.

The lens I suggested is a step up lens.  And the "L" lens I recommended is a full on professional lens.  The best that Canon makes.

You will be more than happy with your original selection.     Go make some beautiful pictures!

[mauriciocayo]

Last question!

Which Makro lenses would you me recommend? I don't know much about it.

THanks

[ebiggs1]

The Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Lens, with out doubt a best-buy!

[mauriciocayo]

thanks! and some other not sooo professional (let's say not sooo expensive) ?

[ebiggs1]

" (let's say not sooo expensive)"

Unfortunately, as a recommendation from me this is going to be the least expensive choice.  There are no others I can give my blessing to. For one thing I generally don't recommend any off-brand lenses and that is where you will have to go.

Only time I will recommend an off-brand lens is if Canon does not make one or the Canon is so ridiculous high priced most folks can't afford it.

You might check out the Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro Standard AutoFocus Lens. I pesonally don't like it.

But it is a reasonable alternative and a little cheaper but remember not even in the same class as the EF 100mm f2.8.

[Skirball]

---

@mauriciocayo wrote:

thanks! and some other not sooo professional (let's say not sooo expensive) ?

---

Canon makes two 100mm macro lenses, the L and the “non-L” as recommended above.  Just making sure you weren’t looking at the price of the L version ($1000+) vs the non-L (< $600).  You could probably get a refurbished L directly from Canon (with warranty) for $450 or so.

I don’t have anything against third party lenses, but I agree with eBiggs on this one; Canon makes some of the best macro lenses out there, and they have a wide assortment of options at different price ranges.    Both of the 100mm macros, and the MP-E 65 are some of the best consumer options out there.  If it’s not in the budget I’d suggest saving until it is.

[mauriciocayo]

@Macro
What I think about 60mm is that is not heavy and easy to handel. Also it works with close fotos and open fotos, right?
I dont exactly need to take pictures just from insects, i would like to make artistic photos about things and create some stories.
Can imagine to choose a 60 instead of a 100mm?

[ebiggs1]

The folks I know that have the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM seem to be very happy with it.

 Its angle of view is equivalent to a 96mm lens on a FF body.

[OldSlowHans]

For a macro lens, look at the Tokina AT-X 100mm f/2.8.  Does spectacular work as a macro, and doubles as a very good portrait lens also.