Buying a 70D body this week. Any lens suggestions would be VERY helpful.

[aholeinthewor1d]

I know a lot of people debate about getting a camera with a kit lens or getting the body and then a better lens. I am not asking about that. The deal I am getting through Adorama is for the body only so I have to get a separate lens. For right now I just want the best possible "general" lens I can get for a decent price. So I am considering getting the normal 18-55 STM lens that would normally come with the kit but I wanted some opinions about if there was anything better for the price or around the price. This is canons rebate form with some lenses and I would also consider 3rd party lens suggestions. http://www.adorama.com/pdfs/rebates/Canon_MIR_Nov_2014.pdf

If you had to get the body only please let me know what you would get for a general lens. If there is something similar to the kit lens price (or a little higher) that is better I would like to get that. Thank you!!

[ebiggs1]

"How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS?"

One of the real "sleepers" in the Canon line.  This lens does it all and very well considering it's price point.  Some call it the "Golden Boy" of lenses.  It is my next in line, to the 24-105mmf4 L, best buy in a Canon lens.

[Skirball]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS?

---

I was going to suggest the same.  In fact it's on sale at the refurbished site, I was just about to post the link when he mentioned that they already have two standard zooms.   Well, "they" is his girlfriend, but for now they have two.  Might as well expand your capabilities a bit instead of add a third.

[HPL]

KEH.com has several of them also. 

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Skirball wrote:

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS?

---

I was going to suggest the same.  In fact it's on sale at the refurbished site, I was just about to post the link when he mentioned that they already have two standard zooms.   Well, "they" is his girlfriend, but for now they have two.  Might as well expand your capabilities a bit instead of add a third.

---

On a 70D, I think of the 28-135 as a moderate telephoto rather than a standard zoom. It goes 60mm longer than any lens "they" already have.

[Skirball]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@Skirball wrote:

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

How about the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS?

---

I was going to suggest the same.  In fact it's on sale at the refurbished site, I was just about to post the link when he mentioned that they already have two standard zooms.   Well, "they" is his girlfriend, but for now they have two.  Might as well expand your capabilities a bit instead of add a third.

---

On a 70D, I think of the 28-135 as a moderate telephoto rather than a standard zoom. It goes 60mm longer than any lens "they" already have.

---

Sure.  And a 55-250 goes 175mm longer than any lens "they" already have.

[TCampbell]

A consideration on the the zoon ranges is that these 28-75 & 28-135 zooms have no wide-angle side to them when they're used on a 70D.

A "normal" focal length (one which does not appear "wide angle" nor "telephoto") is a focal length which matches the diagonal measure of the imaging chip.  

A 70D's chip is 22.5 x 15mm -- giving a diagonal of 27mm.    Nobody makes a 27mm exactly, so that would make a 28mm lens as close to normal as it gets for this camera.  Anything below 27mm offers some wide angle and anything above offers some telephoto.  This is why the kit lens is for so many APS-C cameras is an 18-55 or, on the higher end, an 18-135.  These lenses can be used as general purpose standard zooms... offering a bit of wide angle plus telephoto.

A refurb'd 18-135 non-STM is on sale in Canon's store for $299.  The refurb'd 18-135 STM version is $439.  A "new" 18-135 STM is $549.  The 18-135mm STM would probably be my #1 pick for a 70D.  The STM focusing motor is noticeably faster than the non-STM (but not as fast as USM) and if video recording is something you think you might do, then it's also got the benefit of being much quieter -- focus motor noise is unlikely to be a distraction in your videos.

There is the mention the BMX thing and if photography of BMX is important, than snappy focusing motors will be a really big deal (otherwise the action will fly by before the camera can focus.)  Action photography tends to mean expensive lenses (think $2k+ for the ideal lenses... on a budget you can work with less money but be prepared to accept compromises.)  An STM lens wont be completely ideal, but it'll do much better than a lens with standard focusing motors.  Scott Kelby (a well-known photographer who shoots a lot of sports) did a seminar that got recorded and he starts out by telling the audience that to get into sports photography, you need a suitcase full of money.  He's only partially joking because he does go on to explain that you're often shooting fast action (need fast shutter speeds), in poor lighting (need low-aperture lenses), and usually at distance (need somewhat long focal length lenses).  When you add those up, you get REALLY expensive price tags.  

[HPL]

After re-reading this part of your post: "family parties, holidays, pictures of my nephew and cousins"   I believe you will be better served by something wide and relatively fast as opposed to a longer zoom.  Unless your girlfriend is always with you, I think you might want to reconsider duplication of the 18-55.  That lens has the advantage of being available pretty cheap previously owned.  It will give you somehting to start with without cutting too deeply into your pocketbook and then you can begin saving up for something like a previously owned 24-70 F:2.8 or maybe one of the wider zooms.  It sounds to me like you will likely be capturing lots of images in relatively tight quarters and with the APS-C you are going to need a pretty short lens.  If you keep with it you are eventually going to want an L series lens so might as well save as much as you can now to start building.

[mrz1342]

hi, pls dont shout at me and dont be angry with me 😞 

i am going to buy a caonon 24-105 f4 based on your recomendation as said: "The EF 24-105mm f4 L is the best buy in the Canon line" (even on APS-C cameras like my 70d). its relly gives me stunning sharpness!

but since i am shooting indoor also, this lens on my 70d will be: 38.4-106mm f6.4 shall i chose other lense like 50mm 1.4 or else? 

or i should trust something like Tamron 16-300 made for APS-C as all-in-one (With less sharpness)?

please advice me

kind regards

[TCampbell]

When you change the crop factor of the camera (using an APS-C body instead of a full-frame body), nothing about the lens changes.  It is STILL a 24-105mm f/4 lens.

The "angle of view" becomes more restricted due to the smaller size sensor.  That makes it rougly the equivalent of what you'd see IF you owned a full-frame camera AND you hypothetically owned zoom lens that could provide a 38-168mm zoom range... it would STILL be f/4 (because the lens really is an f/4 lens).

The only time you multiply the f-stop is when using a teleconverter (e.g. if using a 1.4x or a 2x teleconverter you lose 1 stop (with 1.4x) or 2 stops (2x) respectively.  But this isn't a teleconverter... it's just a crop-body.  A teleconverter actually DOES make the lens "longer" and alters the focal LENGTH and since the true focal length changed but the diamter did not then it means it implicitly also changes the focal RATIO.  That's why you multipley the f-stop by the teleconverter factor to arrive at the new f-stop.   But as there is no teleconverter in use, the focal length and focal ratio does not actually change... only the angle-of-view changes due to the crop-factor of the sensor.

Lenses with more ambitious zoom ranges (super-zooms... such as the Tamron you mention) have to make sacrifices and one of those sacrifices is typically image quality.  

Tests on the Tamron seem to indicate that it's "sharp" (although it has visible barrel distortion and pincushion distortion) at the short focal lengths.  But beyond 100mm (most of it's range) it's merely "average".  Most all-in-one zooms have similar issues.

It's sort of tragic to buy a camera body which was designed to allow you to swap lenses (so you can use the best lens for the job) and then buy an all-in-one lens so that you never have to change lenses.  The image quality drops and, at that point, you may as well not have bought such a nice camera.

it's not that super-zooms have no place.  They're fine for snaps & memento photos, but I wouldn't use one for any serious work.  If you were going on a trip and could ONLY pack one lens... a super-zoom has it's benefits.  But if I'm in a  situation where I'm not constrained as to which lens I can use... I'd much rather use the 24-105mm.  

[ebiggs1]

"If you were going on a trip and could ONLY pack one lens... "

Like that would ever happen!    You mean it does to some people?