Canon 4000D Lens Options?

[kriff7]

Hello to all!

I just got my first DSLR camera as a gift for Christmas this year.. very exciting. I was gifted a Canon EOS 4000D with the 18-55mm lens that comes included. Off the bat, I am not a fan of the lens. I am aware of the crop factor and that the 4000D isn't a "high end" camera body, which is all good as I am a beginner. 

I am interested in dipping my feet into wildlife photography and landscapes. Definitely showing more interest in wildlife. I was looking into the EF 24-105mm f/4 is usm mk1. I'm unsure though if this lens is the right option. 

I am for sure not looking to spend thousands of dollars, but would really like to invest in a good versatile lens as I am unsure what my niche is.

Thank you!

[Wandalynn]

Congratulations on your new camera! I like the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS mark ii for nature and definitely get the mark ii, not the mark i. I had a mark ii and when I upgraded to a 100-400, I gave the 70-300 to a friend. Then I wished I hadn't (because the 100-400 was too heavy to carry on hikes) so then bought a used mark i, trying to save money. I was extremely disappointed in the differences between the mark i and mark ii, so much so that I sold the mark i as soon as I could. 

For wide angle, you might consider the economical but very worthy EF-S 10-18mm (equivalent to 16-29mm). I had one of those as well as the EF-S 15-85 mentioned above and loved both of them.

[Wandalynn]

One more thing I thought of, and I didn't go back to see if anyone has mentioned this: minimum focusing distance capability of a lens. For me, it's very important because I like to photograph butterflies, dragonflies, etc. which are small enough that a long MFD not only creates a challenge for your auto focus system to "find" your small subject, but by the time you have to crop the picture down, you may not like the (pixely) results. I just noticed a chart on this forum showing that the Canon EF 70-300 ii has a MFD of 47" (1200mm), which isn't too bad, but some of the longer less expensive lenses have very long MFD's. Just something to be aware of when selecting a lens--look at the specs.

[Tronhard]

For Wandalynn:
Is this something that you are asking for yourself?   As I observe you seem to specialize in close-up imagery, I would suggest the addition of a set of automatic extension tubes to give you a much larger image with any lens that you have.  I stumbled upon this video just after writing this as I have the Sigma 60-600, but it refers to the use of extension tubes, so have included this for added information.  If you go to timestamp 7:23 in the video you will see a demonstration of the use of extension tubes - just ignore all the stuff about focus breathing per se.
Sigma 60-600 vs Sony 200-600: BEST WILDLIFE ZOOM LENS! - YouTube

For the OP
We don't know that the OP's definition of wildlife covers very small objects close up.  In any case, if it is critical, I would expect that they would look that up in the specs. As the OP's combination of wildlife and landscapes is a wide one, it is hard to find a single lens that is capable of both, especially if one is then extending that definition into close-up photography.  By close-up photography I do not include macro capability in its strictest sense.   

In the OP's case, it is for that reason that I suggested two lenses:   the EF-S 18-135 IS STM or USM, and the EF 70-300 MkII.  While they each have a range that is complementary, with some degree of overlap, they are both reasonably capable of getting close-up shots.  For example: these images are taken as indicated with the two different lenses, hand-held in available light.

Canon 80D, EF-S 18-135@135mm USM, f/8, 1/2000sec, ISO-200Canon EOS 80D, EF 70-300 MkII@300mm, f/5.6, 1/250sec, ISO-100
In this image the subject is about 2.5cm (1") in diameter, so I think that would qualify.

The other criteria of the OP we know is budget, and that lens combination would likely be within, or very close to the $800 maximum specified.   One of the most important criteria is what is going to be produced, and while that is not specified, it is unlikely that the OP is going to attempt large, detailed prints - especially with a Canon 4000D.  Most likely we are looking at output on digital devices - either monitors or via social media - where both of these lenses are quite capable of generating acceptable results. For example on this site, the resultant images are drastically reduced in resolution.

[Wandalynn]

All good points. I'll check the video. Thanks, Trevor!

Wanda