ART Good step up lens from the kit lens? Canon 18-55 kit lens

[6SpeedTA95]

What is a good step up lens in terms of optical quality/glass quality. Focal range isn't overly important, I have a 55-250 which is decent quality (another kit quality lens). But I've thought about the possibility of a better 18ish to 55 or 18 to 85ish focal range lens. But something that has an aperture of 1.4 or 2.8, something better than the kit lens. This will give me more versatility in low light situations (ie shooting friends/family indoors).

Thoughts? Recommendations?

 

[nofriends]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non-VC

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

 

[Prison Mike]

^+1

 

[themolsen]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non-VC

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

yessir

 

[smaug]

learn how to take good pics first, then spend money on lenses.

 

[6SpeedTA95]

Tamron 17-50 is fantastic, though it hunts a bit in low light, it's still great.

The Canon 17-55 is quite nice, made only for crop sensors, but a bit pricey...

so if I upgrade to full frame later it won't be usable?

 

[6SpeedTA95]

learn how to take good pics first, then spend money on lenses.

I agree with you. Just had an instance this weekend where some better low light ability would have been very good to have.

 

[6SpeedTA95]

That's right, it's an EF-S Mount, but I do believe the Tamron 17-50 can mount on a FF.

A friend of mine recommended I buy lenses that work on full frame bodies because he thinks at some point in the next few years I'll want to upgrade.

 

[grphx]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non-VC

http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-Lens-Review.aspx

x2

 

[Marix]

What body have you got?

Because honestly the lens might not be such a limiting factor for you right now.

2.8 to 5.6 (the slowest end of your kit lens) is two stops so why not try upping the ISO and see if the results are acceptable before rushing out and buying more stuff

 

[smaug]

What body have you got?

Because honestly the lens might not be such a limiting factor for you right now.

2.8 to 5.6 (the slowest end of your kit lens) is two stops so why not try upping the ISO and see if the results are acceptable before rushing out and buying more stuff

exactly my point.

learn how to use the camera, then worry about lenses.

 

[nofriends]

Tamron 17-50 is fantastic, though it hunts a bit in low light, it's still great.

The Canon 17-55 is quite nice, made only for crop sensors, but a bit pricey...

The Tamron is sharper 90% of the time and is almost 1/3 the price of the Canon 17-55 2.8.

http://the-digital-picture.com/Revi...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

 

[Wobistdu]

tamron 17-50 2.8 non-vc

sharp as fuck and doesn't hunt as bad as people love to say

fuck buying for FF. worry about FF lenses when you are adding a FF camera to your shopping cart

 

[Pikel]

Tamron 17-50 2.8 crew holler

 

[6SpeedTA95]

What body have you got?

Because honestly the lens might not be such a limiting factor for you right now.

2.8 to 5.6 (the slowest end of your kit lens) is two stops so why not try upping the ISO and see if the results are acceptable before rushing out and buying more stuff

I've got a T2i and from the reviews I've read the lens is a setback for this camera.

But I am not yet able to fully utilize the capability of the camera...

 

[6SpeedTA95]

What body have you got?

Because honestly the lens might not be such a limiting factor for you right now.

2.8 to 5.6 (the slowest end of your kit lens) is two stops so why not try upping the ISO and see if the results are acceptable before rushing out and buying more stuff

ISO 3200 is ok, 6400 gets a bit noisy...hell 3200 has visible noise at reasonable sizes but its acceptable...

I was shooting a lot of ISO 3200 and 6400 at a buddies house during the super bowl. That resulted in a lot of slow shutter speeds so some of the pics of his kids didn't turn out as well as we had hoped.

 

[6SpeedTA95]

The Tamron is sharper 90% of the time and is almost 1/3 the price of the Canon 17-55 2.8.

http://the-digital-picture.com/Revi...meraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

Funny I read this article about four hours ago

 

[nofriends]

Funny I read this article about four hours ago

I bought mine based upon the recommendations from OT. The lens awesome.

I got it used for $330 shipped off POTN.

 

[grphx]

Only bad thing I can think of about the lens is the noise it makes when you are focusing, but then again it's not that bad. Maybe bad if you're shooting a wedding, but you probably wouldn't want to use a f/2.8 for a wedding.

 

[Marix]

I've got a T2i and from the reviews I've read the lens is a setback for this camera.

But I am not yet able to fully utilize the capability of the camera...

Yup. Honestly man we've all been here, hating on our gear for not getting the results we want. You should learn to utilise your camera better before buying a ton of stuff. I think most of us have fallen into that phase at some point.

Instead of reading the reviews (which definitely influence me.. i'm sure they do the same for you), find out exactly what problems you're having.

ISO 3200 is ok, 6400 gets a bit noisy...hell 3200 has visible noise at reasonable sizes but its acceptable...

I was shooting a lot of ISO 3200 and 6400 at a buddies house during the super bowl. That resulted in a lot of slow shutter speeds so some of the pics of his kids didn't turn out as well as we had hoped.

The Tamron is reportedly a great lens, and it will get you an extra stop at the wide end and two more stops at 50mm. I get the impression you're just starting out so honestly I'd advise that you just step up the ISO a bit more, especially if they're just photos for fun or for friends. You can do great noise reduction with software now anyway.

By the way, if you're at ISO 3200 and 6400 inside his house couldn't you just turn on a light?

 

[Wobistdu]

i shot with my 18-105 kit lens for a month and realized how much it sucked. soft as shit, usually wide open was f/4 or tighter... kit lenses just suck

 

[6SpeedTA95]

Yup. Honestly man we've all been here, hating on our gear for not getting the results we want. You should learn to utilise your camera better before buying a ton of stuff. I think most of us have fallen into that phase at some point.

Instead of reading the reviews (which definitely influence me.. i'm sure they do the same for you), find out exactly what problems you're having.



The Tamron is reportedly a great lens, and it will get you an extra stop at the wide end and two more stops at 50mm. I get the impression you're just starting out so honestly I'd advise that you just step up the ISO a bit more, especially if they're just photos for fun or for friends. You can do great noise reduction with software now anyway.

By the way, if you're at ISO 3200 and 6400 inside his house couldn't you just turn on a light?

Well it was pretty dim, we were watching the super bowl but his kids were absolutely cracking us up. Could have used the flash, but decided against it.

 

[jsmonet]

the 18-55is feels like shit, sounds like shit, focuses slow as shit, but it's surprisingly high quality considering it's worth all of 80 bucks.

 

[Cesium]

I was shooting a lot of ISO 3200 and 6400 at a buddies house during the super bowl. That resulted in a lot of slow shutter speeds so some of the pics of his kids didn't turn out as well as we had hoped.

I have just the lens upgrade for you then.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/571297-USA/Canon_2805B002_430EX_II_Speedlite_TTL.html

 

[JeffForSale]

So I was also look for a good step up lens from my t2i kit lens and I came across this thread. I'm basically torn between 3 choice and I'm not sure what decision to make. Any suggestions yall could provide would be helpful!

Tamron 17-50 2.8 - In two different threads this has been the main suggestion

24 mm - 70 mm - F/2.8 - Friends have suggested this one to me. Thoughts?

24 mm - 105 mm - F/4.0 - Another friend suggested this to me cause it has image stabilization, is half the weight, and a little less expensive. There's a whole stop difference between the two though

I'm looking for a good all around/ walk around lens. Mainly for photography and SOME video