looking for lens suggestions

[4HOLIDAYS]

Ok-so I have decided to get a Canon T4i, but now I need suggestions as to what lens to get with it.

Yrs of P&S, which I have gotten some great photos but wold like better.

I can get just the body, the body with 18-55 IS 3.5-5.6, the body with 18-55IS STM 3.5-5.6. I have also been looking at an all in one 18-250mm 3.5-6.3 , or the 55-250mm as additional.

I use this for the usual family activities, lots of inside and out, my son's ice hockey,archery and other kids sports,plus lots of WDW and vacations where there is all conditions-movement,lowlight,closeup,cloudy,sunny...

My DH really thinks we should just get a body and the 18-250 so I don't have to worry about carrying and changing lenses. We try to take just my 1 tote on vaca,parks,...I don't see myself with a colection of lenses anytime soon so I want to try and get it right the first time.

I won't be doing more than 8x10 prints or online and photobooks.

Thanks again for all the help.
Jennifer

 

[photo_chick]

My 2 cents... An all in one like the 18-250 is convenient, but that comes at a price. The f/6.3 on the long end is really slow. If you want to use it for hockey you will run into problems there. It's tough enough to do indoor sports with the 55-250 because it's already slow at f/5.6. Also, the all in ones tend to loose some sharpness, so if you have to pump up that ISO (like indoor sports would necessitate) you will run into problems with people turning into blobs. All in one lenses are great for ideal lighting situations and for tripod work. But they aren't so great on the long end in lower light.

I usually say just buy the camera with the kit lens until you know what you need, but if you know from the get go that you want to shoot a lot of kids sports then it may be worth your while to invest in a basic telephoto zoom like the 55-250, or even go used with something like the 70-210 f/4 (I have this one and it's old but an outstanding lens). Something that you can replace with little monetary loss when you can make a better educated decision on which telephoto zoom is right for you since they can easily run $1000+.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I agree with photo chick, until you learn your camera and what you really are going to shoot, its difficult to recommend something. All lenses are not created equal. Lenses are problem solvers. First determine what is not working for you with what you have and then fix the problem. Several times you mentioned areas of photography that involve motion and lowlight. All-in-ones, for the most part, will struggle in those conditions. I shoot sports in those conditions and had to purchase the correct equipment to make it easier on myself. With that came added expense, lenses costing $1,000+! Unless you have an unlimited budget, then you really need to evaluate the cost/benefit factor. Are the shots I'm trying to obtain worth the added expense. That's a question only you can answer. So, for right now, I would recommend the kit lens, learn the camera and your needs, then solve the problems you find by purchasing the correct lens to fix the problem.

 

[SplashMo]

I have an older version of the same camera. I really like it. My favorite lens is the 85mm f1.8 and it is pretty much a steal. It is great for sports and portraits (Shoulders up). This lens will really show of the DSLR portion of the camera giving you blurred back grounds and great pictures. It leaves you missing a wide angle and a long telephoto.

You could add either a 18-55 type lens or the 18-250. I really like a zoom for a wide angle because of cost and also zoom for wide angle is less of a tradeoff.

 

[SplashMo]

One day I would love this lens :

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_200mm_f_2l_is_usm

However at $6000.00 probably not...

For the wide if you wanted to go up a notch:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_10_22mm_f_3_5_4_5_usm

I am also considering picking up a second camera for wide angle. Perhaps a SONY NEX with a wide angle zoom. To compliment the 85mm on the Canon.

 

[SplashMo]

Here are some lens reviews : http://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/index.htm

Ken is really down to earth...

 

[meanpc]

Get the kit 18-55 for general purpose outdoors stuff. Get the 85/1.8 for sports and low light photography. Wide angle zoom and a nice piece of fast glass. Cheap zooms are junk indoors.

 

[Frantasmic]

Photochick gives the best advice. Additionally, don't buy a lens based on convenience for 2-3 weeks a year. Buy the one(s) you will use the most. Your all in one is a great choice, only if 95 percent of your photos are either outside or perfectly lit. I suggest the kit lens and the 55-250 IS. Add the 85 when you can if you have indoor sports. Those three lenses are a good trio to have. Your camera will never be magic; neither will the lenses. It is up to you to get the shots.

 

[4HOLIDAYS]

Thanks, so much for the info. I had read a bunch of reviews on the 18-250 and told my DH I wasn't sure it would do for the lowlight and hockey but I wanted to ask the "real" disboard experts!

So, will there be much difference between the 18-55mm and the 18-135mm in usability?The 18-135mm is about $150 more ,so not much money wise. I think one of these is what I will start with to learn my camera and what I really need.

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Thanks, so much for the info. I had read a bunch of reviews on the 18-250 and told my DH I wasn't sure it would do for the lowlight and hockey but I wanted to ask the "real" disboard experts!

So, will there be much difference between the 18-55mm and the 18-135mm in usability?The 18-135mm is about $150 more ,so not much money wise. I think one of these is what I will start with to learn my camera and what I really need.

The word usability is a very subjective word. Several Canon shooters on this thread use the 18-135 as their walkaround lens. They both are variable aperture lens which means as you zoom the aperture or opening becomes smaller allowing less light to the camera sensor. The higher the number the smaller the opening (aperture or f-stop). When we talk about slow lenses that is what we are talking about. With the ISO being equal, a slow lens allows less light in therefore causing the shutter to stay open longer (slow shutter speed). We can adjust the ISO to speed up the shutter speed, but that introduces the element of noise (electronic speckling of the images). Everything is a trade-off of compromises. Every sports photographer that I know (and that is many), have as their go to lens a 70-200 f2.8 in their bag. That is a not-so-cheap lens.

If you are not familar with the photographic triangle of shutter speed-aperture-ISO, I would recommend a book by Bryan Peterson, "Understanding Exposure". If you understand concept of the triangle, then lens selection becomes easier. I think it goes for $16 on Amazon and he also has an e-book. It will probably be the cheapest photography thing you buy!

 

[HPS3]

If I'm not mistaking, the new STM lenses were made specifically for this new T4i. I'm not too familiar with it but it's built for focusing during video. I would either get the 18-55 or the new pancake 4?mm STM lens. Just my 2 cents.

 

[photo_chick]

Thanks, so much for the info. I had read a bunch of reviews on the 18-250 and told my DH I wasn't sure it would do for the lowlight and hockey but I wanted to ask the "real" disboard experts!

So, will there be much difference between the 18-55mm and the 18-135mm in usability?The 18-135mm is about $150 more ,so not much money wise. I think one of these is what I will start with to learn my camera and what I really need.

With the 18-135 you get more reach and a slightly wider aperture in the wider angles covered by both. The 18-55 is lighter. The 18-135 is available with the STM motor now, the 18-55 is not. The advantage of an STM lens is that it lets you continuously auto focus when shooting video which could be helpful for shooting home videos. If that is something that interests you then it might help you make your decision.