Help with lens

[skbachand]

I love this photography board. Have always loved taking pictures and am finally ready to go to the next level. I convinced my husband that I really needed a DSLR and bought one tax free this weekend.(thanks Mitt Romney) I got the Canon Rebel kit-because I needed instant gratification with a lens.
Now I have read all the threads about the "Kelly" and think that sounds great. But a few of my friends have the Canon ??-300 who love it. Now I have a young daughter, mostly pics of her. We are going to disney in Oct and while the "not you average tourist" thread has gotten the creative juices going I think most of my time will be watching her reaction to things. So my question is if I can only have 1 lens-mostly taking pics of little ones with the mouse etc.. What are you recommendations. I have a pretty steady hand, am not into dragging a tripod around (*yet). From what I know you can't really walk around with ??-300 lens on but the no IS on the "kelly" I guess has me concerned. Can you guru's help me?? Thanks

 

[JR6ooo4]

I have the same cam and
canon 28-135 IS (72mm diameter lens!) older IS but still good
canon 70-300 IS (the 75-300 is not the same) newer dual IS modes
and the 50mm 1.8 for spectro magic

Although I haul the 70-300 all day, it is probably too big for family use. Like trying to manage kids. But you can get a holster type bag that it will slip into quite quickly and be water resistant for some rides.
the zoom is very nice.
Mikeeeee

 

[Kelly Grannell]

everything's been answered by JR.

The only exception is that I also highly recommend Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Pricey, but absolutely gorgeous!

 

[WillCAD]

The Kelly (Sigma 18-125) is a perfect lens for casual photographers who want a single lens to carry around the parks at WDW.

The 18-125 can get great wide angle shots at 18mm, and great zoomed shots at 125mm.

At 125, it is perfectly possible to get sharp, clear shots without IS, as long as you are not bouncing around on Kilamanjaro Safari. Although the IS feature is a terrific new innovation, it's certainly not nessecary for EVERY lens.

The film equivalent of the 18-125 is the older 28-200 lens. I have one of these for my film camera and have taken it to WDW many times. This lens, too, has no IS feature, but that has never been a concern for me. I have gotten hundreds of terrific pics with that lens, and I look forward to taking my 18-125 lens to WDW in December.

For the casual photographer, there is no better walkaround lens than the Kelly.

 

[homerdog]

I would suggest that you stick with the kit lens for a while - 18-55 is a good range and will give you the opportunity to learn all about framing and composition by using your feet, rather than just relying on the zoom ring!

Try to keep the lens stopped down as much as you can (that means setting an aperture of around f7.1 - f11, using Av mode), because that is where this lens produces the sharpest results. If you find that this leads to a shutter speed that is too slow, you can always increase the ISO (the sensitivity of the sensor), as the Rebel is very good in terms of (lack of) high ISO noise

 

[jann1033]

i agree, use what you have for a few months and figure out what you take mostly..then pre trip buy whatever covers that..if you don't find yourself doing much wide angle you might want something that gives you more zoom or maybe you really just pretty much shoot within your lens...with my old film rebel and the 28-80 lens ( which is kind of similar to what you have now) after i used it for a while i knew i wanted more zoom since i got aggravated everytime i couldn't take pictures i wanted...then hmm, light bulb, "i need more zoom"!

imo ( worth what it cost ya...$0) everyone is different and so no "perfect lens" for everyone..i love the IS but i have earthquake like shaky hands...but don't know that i'd feel the need otherwise for it ( ie before i got tremors, never needed it)

 

[skbachand]

Thanks everyone for your input. How long has the IS technology been around? I am just curious. Also the other lens that Kelly recommended, I am guessing because of the aperature on it??

 

[Kelly Grannell]

The IS technology have been around for quite some time from Canon (or maybe Nikon, I honestly don't know). The first generation Canon IS truly suck. Even as a heavy Canon user I have to admit to their suckiness. I think that was about 8 years ago if not more. Then they (Canon) better their IS system but only for their L lenses. A couple of years ago, they officially introduced the next generation of IS with faster response and with tripod-sensing capability (IS off when it detects less than certain amount of movement).

The reason 17-55 f/2.8 IS is pricey are numerous.

1. it beats 17-40 f/4L in picture quality (I sold mine right away)
2. it beats 24-105 f/4L IS in picture quality too (I only borrowed my boss' lens, never bought it)
3. the crazy **** aperture of f/2.8

I have shaky wrist and I can take pics at 55mm focal length (equivalent to 80mm in 35mm camera, meaning the ideal minimum shutter speed is 1/80 sec) at 1/13 sec !!! That's a true near-3-stop advantage!