help picking a lens for what i will use it for

[Maria]

I'm an amature photographer. i have a T1i that needs to be replaced (likely with either the 70D or the 7D)... and with it I want a lens that will fit my needs... i've read and read about various lenses at different price points and all have their purposes but i can't seem to figure out which would be the best fit for my purpose.

Hoping i can get some advice/recommendations for a lens to use when photographing the following:

1) indoor with low light (and limited to only using a 430EX II flash on the camera, no reflectors, or other sources of light other than what ever is overhead - ie typical home lighting)

2) subject 75% of the time is a child that won't stay still :), the other 25% of the time it's friends and family at someones home or at a venue (again low light)

3) subject is usually 10-15 feet away from me and i want to be able to get a full shot (head to toe) and also zoom in to only get a head shot.

4) i love bokeh 😉

I want sharp images with saturated colors (when they exist in the picture 😉  ). The lens can't be too heavy (i tried holding a 17-55mm and was on the high end of what i can carry -probably don't want to go much more than that for weight).

Any and all suggestions welcome!

[cicopo]

I think Maria might live here in Canada based on her mentioning Henry's (one of our major chains ) . Refurbs aren't that available in Canada either so that may not be worth investigating. As for the 7D it's getting a little old & maybe the 70D might be a better fit based on early reviews / user comments. I shot a 7D for 3 years & the AF is very good and so were photos up to & including ISO 3200 as long as you weren't looking for a big print. As for the 55-250 they are available used almost daily on Kijiji.

[ebiggs1]

I am getting a little confused. You are sending mixed requirements. If weight is an issue, the 7D is out. It's really big improvement over a T5i or SL-1 is it's robust build and it is a larger camera. It is a pro level body.

The SL-1 is the lightest, low cost, body Canon has right now and it will better your T1i in low light ability. Personally I would prefer the T5i to the SL-1 because it is so light and small.

Again if weight is a factor the big very heavy "L" lenses are out. Not to mention cost but the 70-200mm f4 non IS would be a choice and compromise.

You really need to go somewhere and try these out in your own hands and see.

[ebiggs1]

“Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 - a bit soft all around and struggles in low light “

“Canon 28-90f/4-5.6 non IS kit lens from an older film camera (Elan II) - haven't used in years...”

Almost any current Canon lens will best either of these and certainly the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II Lens does. Adding validity to the suggestion of buying lenses instead of upgrading the camera for another consideration.

I am still going to go with the SL-1 or T5i for you, however, and just use what lenses you have.

[Maria]

You've all given me a lot to think about and options - thank you!!  i was hoping to find something within my original requirements list but it seems like that is not really possible thus the need to revisit needs, wants and limitations along the way in this thread.

Yes i am in Canada and i haven't found much used from a retailer  and only the odd thing on Kijiji and I'm not sure i'm comfortable with buying via kijiji as i have no idea how good or bad the lens has been treated in the past and if i have an issue with it i can't 'return' - not that i'd be able to judge use if buying second hand from a retailer but it may be a better option IF they offer some type of warranty or return policy.

I think the next step is (as suggested) to go back to the store and hold these cameras and lenses - feel them and see what feels right.  My only options for local retailers are Henry's, Future Shop, BestBuy, or Costco (which has a few limited options as kits).

Thanks Again!!

[Maria]

Well after reading and reading i have to accept that i can't get a better camera AND a better lens and not increase weight and so something has to give and i need to find a way to deal with it.  Based on the input provided i think most would say to use the weight on the lens vs the camera.  I went to the store and looked at the T5i, the 70D and the 7D and there is a noticable difference.  When i used all three for a bit i didn't like the T5i as much - although similar to my current camera i like the feel of the others better.  And since the 70D is lighter it is probably the better choice for me. i won't be buying the camera for a couple months so have time to retest them and hold them.

I wanted to see the 55-250 IS but they didn't have any.  The sales person (a different one than i've talked to before) suggested the 17-135mm f/1.8 instead. But he couldn't find one so couldn't show it to me.  When i searched online i couldn't find this lens?  Does it even exist?   Mabye he referenced it incorrectly? He was sure it a zoom f/1.8...

So i then went back to the lens i've read and heard so many great things about.  The 24-70mm f/2.8L II.  I took the plunge and got it.  Although very excited the day of and the day after today is day 3 and i think i went overboard.  I have 14 days to return so it's now time to be sure this is the right decision.  I took several shots in the evening (outdoors).  The biggest benefit i see to this lens in the shots i took was  the f2/8 - but it cost me a little over $2k.  It is heavy and i found i had to walk around holding in it in my hand vs letting my neck hold the weight ;(  do i like that, no, but i stopped to think about it and i don't often walk around with it on my neck.  it's usually in my bag and only take it out when i want to use it.  Especially since most of my photos are of my daughter ... i'm not necessarily walking around the city with it for shots.. that would be a rare case for me. Even when out and about it is in my bag and only comes out when i get to a location like and want to capture a shot of. I can hold a backpack so that is what i do when traveling/sight seeing etc.  So i'm willing to hold it in my hand to get a f/2.8.  I also saw a hand strap on line that may be good as an extra safety measure when holding.

Now to add the IS piece to this - i originally asked the question of IS in another thread with the Canon 70-200 in mind but while at the store and looking at the 24-70 another person in the store suggested the 28-70 f2.8 Tamron that has Image Stabilization...  definatley a lower price point and will an amature like me really notice a big difference between the Tamron and the Canon?? Not sure... the Tamron is also lighter.  But they didn't have one so would have to get online somewhere...  I like how sharp the Canon 24-70 is, i don't know if the Tamron would compare... but now that i know it exists i wonder how good it is.

The reason i like the idea of the 24-70 was that i could almost use it as an all in one - ie put it on my camera and use it for pretty much everything when photographing my daughter.... since i'm using it on a crop sensor camera (now and later) it really gives me more like a 36-105... so i might need to take a step back once in while but would give me the zoom...  but that would also be the case of the 55-250... i'd get IS with the later but not f/2.8. 

So after all that babbling, here is what i'd like to get your input on,

1) if choosing between the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II and the Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD which do you recommend?  When/where would you notice a difference in these?

2) would either of the above be a better choice over the Canon 55-250 f/4-5.6)?? not sure if this is made for a crop or full sensor?

3) and what about that unknown 17-135mm f/1.8??

I know i'm going all over the place and I applogize but this isn't easy ;(   I hope i'm not frustrating anyone ;(  just confused... and the more i look at this the more options i consider... which i know isnt' making it any easier but rather more confusing... sigh...

[cicopo]

I don't think Canon makes ANY zoom with an f1.8 aperture. so that's not on the table. The Tamron gets good reviews & is worth investigating but so does the 15-85 which although not an f2.8 lens has IS & isn't as heavy as the Canon 24-70 and the 15-85 hes excellent reviews. I don't have any of these but do have the 24-105f4.0  L IS and it's excellent too .

[TCampbell]

---

@Maria wrote:

So after all that babbling, here is what i'd like to get your input on,

1) if choosing between the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II and the Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD which do you recommend?  When/where would you notice a difference in these?

2) would either of the above be a better choice over the Canon 55-250 f/4-5.6)?? not sure if this is made for a crop or full sensor?

3) and what about that unknown 17-135mm f/1.8??

The reason people consider the Tamron is based entirely on cost savings.  The Canon easily outperforms the Tamron.  In fact... reviewers gush over the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II so much that it's often considered "best in class" (in other words... it outperforms every vendor's 24-70 lens -- not just those intended to go on Canon bodies... even those intended for non-Canon bodies.)  So unless you're asking about cost savings, the Canon is the better lens.

This, btw, is often true.  In nearly every lens review I study of a Canon vs. 3rd party glass, the Canon is usually more expensive, but it nearly always is the better performer.

The Canon EF-S 55-250 is a designed to work on any Canon APS-C crop frame camera body.  This includes all "Rebel" bodies as well as all mid-range bodies (50D, 60D, 70D), and also the 7D.   But the 55-250 is for a completely different range than the 24-70.  You can use a 24-70 as a general purpose lens.  The 55-250 is a telephoto zoom (There is no 'normal' or 'wide angle' range on that lens... it's always zoomed in... the question is whether it's zoom in a little or zoomed in a lot.)  I was never particularly thrilled with the 55-250.  It's a consumer-grade lens designed to provide an affordable zoom and in that regard it does ok.  I use an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM these days and have been extremely happy with it.

If you go to a traditional "camera" or "photography" store (by which I mean a dedicated store that caters pretty much to photography exclusively and doesn't sell anything else) AND this store is not a "chain" store (e.g. not Ritz Camera, etc.) THEN I generally find the sales people are actually experienced photographers.  In a chain store or big box store, they're just sales people... whether they sell cameras, shoes, or french fries doesn't seem to make any difference to them.  They generally don't know the products and I would be extremely cautios about taking their advice.

There is no such thing as 17-135mm f/1.8.  Canon makes an 18-135mm f/3-5-5.6 zoom... but nothing with a low focal ratio.   In fact, I've never seen anybody make a zoom that could provide a focal ratio lower than f/2.8 (and the f/2.8 zooms are very expensive as you have no doubt already noticed.)

As for the weight of the camera & lens... the traditional factory neck-strap isn't particularly comfortable for all-day use.  You may want to check out a sling-type camera strap.  The Black Rapid brand and Carry Speed brands are extremely good.  I use a Black Rapid RS-7 strap and I can carry the camera all day and never get tired of it (and I'm carrying a gripped 5D III so the body is much heavier).  The camera hangs at your side (the strap goes around your body like a sash) so it's out of the way when you aren't shooting.  Also the camera hangs upside-down from it's tripod bolt (if the lens is heavier than the body then you'd attach it to the lens' tripod collar.)

[Maria]

thanks for the quick responses!

i guess that is what it comes down to - the cost - yes i spent the money on it and it's not going to kill me that is why i did it.  But is it the best choice .... By using the 24-70 lens on my camera (as the main one that stays on there for 90+% of the time, only to be taken off to use the 50mm f/1.8 the odd time) i will not have anything under 36mm and nothing over 105mm (the crop persepctive) - not necessarily a bad thing but something to keep in mind.. where maybe a 18-200 would give me more, as would the 55-250 - but i don't think they even compare to the 24-70??? 

Maybe i need to take deep breath and just enjoy my new glass for a week and see how we do together 😉 thanks for helping me with my mini panic attack 😉

[cicopo]

There is no question that the 24-70 is best in class but the difference in IQ isn't proportional to the price difference. As for an 18-200 or 18-270 etc many dismiss them as too much of a compromise but I've done quite well with the ones I've owned but then again I rarely shoot wide open & I am NOT a shallow DOF person.

[ebiggs1]

Well you certainly started at the top of mountain. Don't even consider a 50mm f1.8 next to that 24-70mm.

There is really only one other lens in the same class as the one you got. It is the 70-200mm f2.8 Series II and it has a price tag to match.