Options...

[rachel09985]

I need advice

I am contemplating two options.

1.) Upgrading to the 18-200 Canon (or Tamron 18-270) and selling my kit lens.Would there be a reason to still keep my kit lens if I went this route?

2.) Keeping the kit lens and getting the Canon 55-250.

What would you choose and why??

Thanks so much for your help.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

I need advice

I am contemplating two options.

1.) Upgrading to the 18-200 Canon (or Tamron 18-270) and selling my kit lens.Would there be a reason to still keep my kit lens if I went this route?

2.) Keeping the kit lens and getting the Canon 55-250.

What would you choose and why??

Thanks so much for your help.

Kit lens is good to keep around for a backup or if you ever decide to sell your camera. I had the 18-55 and the 55-200 (Nikon) and HATED switching lenses. I went with the Sigma 18-250 and love having on the camera. My brother has the Tamron 18-270 and thoroughly enjoys it also. Good luck with your purchase!!!!

 

[bob100]

I need advice

I am contemplating two options.

1.) Upgrading to the 18-200 Canon (or Tamron 18-270) and selling my kit lens.Would there be a reason to still keep my kit lens if I went this route?

2.) Keeping the kit lens and getting the Canon 55-250.

What would you choose and why??

Thanks so much for your help.

option 2 because:

(1) the wider focal range lens won't give you the largest aperture at the same focal range,
(2) it won't be as sharp as the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combination
(3) the Tamron 18-270 and Canon 18-200 (individually) are more expensive than the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combined

 

[mom2rtk]

Option 2 will get you some great photos at a very reasonable price. But only you know how much you'll dislike changing lenses all the time. Honestly, if I didn't have some nice quality faster lenses, I'd be going with the Tamron 18-270 just to have it all at my fingertips. I have the lens in my kit but just don't use it much since I got my faster lenses. But it's a nice lens that I have gotten some very nice photos with. It's my go-to choice if I'm going to be in a situation where I don't know what I'll want but I don't want to be swapping lenses back and forth a lot.

Whatever you do though, keep the kit lens to bundle with the camera if you ever want to sell it. And you never know when you'll want a smaller profile lens. I can take a DSLR into Disney on Ice, but only if the lens is less than 3" long. That would disqualify many other lenses. I also remember taking my DSLR into the MK on a couple uber-hot days one September. I got tired of carrying around the camera in the heat with bigger lenses, but didn't mind still carrying it with the smaller kit lens. You just never know when it will come in handy.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

option 2 because:

(1) the wider focal range lens won't give you the largest aperture at the same focal range,
(2) it won't be as sharp as the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combination
(3) the Tamron 18-270 and Canon 18-200 (individually) are more expensive than the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combined

One more thing to consider would be the weight difference. The all-in-one lens will weigh in around a pound and a half probably.

Now, add up all the cons and compare it to the pros.
Convenience-never having to switch lenses
Cleaner sensor- The chances of dust getting to the sensor are diminished when the lens never leaves the camera body.
Safer- I came close to dropping a lens while trying to keep up with the rest of the family walking down Main Street and swapping at the same time.

Is it worth it? That's going to depend on the person behind the camera. Personally, until I get into faster glass all around, I'd never go back to swapping lenses every few minutes.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Option 2 will get you some great photos at a very reasonable price. But only you know how much you'll dislike changing lenses all the time. Honestly, if I didn't have some nice quality faster lenses, I'd be going with the Tamron 18-270 just to have it all at my fingertips. I have the lens in my kit but just don't use it much since I got my faster lenses. But it's a nice lens that I have gotten some very nice photos with. It's my go-to choice if I'm going to be in a situation where I don't know what I'll want but I don't want to be swapping lenses back and forth a lot.

Whatever you do though, keep the kit lens to bundle with the camera if you ever want to sell it. And you never know when you'll want a smaller profile lens. I can take a DSLR into Disney on Ice, but only if the lens is less than 3" long. That would disqualify many other lenses. I also remember taking my DSLR into the MK on a couple uber-hot days one September. I got tired of carrying around the camera in the heat with bigger lenses, but didn't mind still carrying it with the smaller kit lens. You just never know when it will come in handy.

 

[rachel09985]

Option 2 will get you some great photos at a very reasonable price. But only you know how much you'll dislike changing lenses all the time. Honestly, if I didn't have some nice quality faster lenses, I'd be going with the Tamron 18-270 just to have it all at my fingertips. I have the lens in my kit but just don't use it much since I got my faster lenses. But it's a nice lens that I have gotten some very nice photos with. It's my go-to choice if I'm going to be in a situation where I don't know what I'll want but I don't want to be swapping lenses back and forth a lot.

Whatever you do though, keep the kit lens to bundle with the camera if you ever want to sell it. And you never know when you'll want a smaller profile lens. I can take a DSLR into Disney on Ice, but only if the lens is less than 3" long. That would disqualify many other lenses. I also remember taking my DSLR into the MK on a couple uber-hot days one September. I got tired of carrying around the camera in the heat with bigger lenses, but didn't mind still carrying it with the smaller kit lens. You just never know when it will come in handy.

Thanks! I will definitely keep the kit lens then.

 

[rachel09985]

One more thing to consider would be the weight difference. The all-in-one lens will weigh in around a pound and a half probably.

Now, add up all the cons and compare it to the pros.
Convenience-never having to switch lenses
Cleaner sensor- The chances of dust getting to the sensor are diminished when the lens never leaves the camera body.
Safer- I came close to dropping a lens while trying to keep up with the rest of the family walking down Main Street and swapping at the same time.

Is it worth it? That's going to depend on the person behind the camera. Personally, until I get into faster glass all around, I'd never go back to swapping lenses every few minutes.

Thanks for your opinion. I don't really mind the weight. I would get worried about always having to switch the lens because I am clumsy!

I just noticed we will be in Disney the same time! I am there Nov 1st-6th.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Thanks for your opinion. I don't really mind the weight. I would get worried about always having to switch the lens because I am clumsy!

Just make sure you have a decent strap. The one that came with my Nikon is fine for a little bit, but after a few hrs and some sunburn it really ate into my neck.

I just noticed we will be in Disney the same time! I am there Nov 1st-6th.

Are you jumping up and down yet?!?!? I can NOT WAIT!!!!
I'm trying to add a new lens to my bag before we head out also. If you see a crazy Phillies fan walking around taking pictures of EVERYTHING, stop over and say hi

 

[photo_chick]

I'm late to the party... but I'd go with option 2 as well for the reasons already stated by others. All in one lenses are generally not upgrades from kit lenses by any means. You gain focal range but you loose in nearly every other way so I'd consider it more of a lateral move.

A lot of people seem to be afraid of changing lenses. But honestly once you get a feel for your camera and the lenses you have you really won't be doing it that much when you're out and about. Some worry about dust... I've been using DSLR's for nearly ten years now and am not shy about changing lenses. Nor do I go out of my way to take any extra precautions to keep dust out, I just use common sense. I have never had a problem with dust on my sensor. And I live in north central Texas where it's dry and very dusty most of the year. Now I have dropped a lens. It was my own stupid fault for not taking the time to slow down. But taking the time to change lenses when you do need to is just part of owning a DSLR. In my opinion if you never want to change lenses you'd probably be far happier with a super zoom or something like the new Sony RX100.

And I totally second having a decent strap. No matter what the lens DSLR bodies get heavy wearing them all day and the stock straps are uncomfortable.

 

[rachel09985]

Thanks for the advice.

I have another question.

If I am going to take food pictures which would be better??

Nifty Fifty- or will the zoom be way too much with that?

Or the kit lens? I would LOVE to get the Tamron 17-55(?) but can't justify that just quite yet with me being a beginner.

 

[mom2rtk]

If I am going to take food pictures which would be better??

Nifty Fifty- or will the zoom be way too much with that?

I'm afraid that with the nifty fifty you might have to take your food pictures from the table next to you.

 

[rachel09985]

I'm afraid that with the nifty fifty you might have to take your food pictures from the table next to you.

Haha that is what I was thinking but I saw on some exif setting that it was at 50mm and the picture looked good! Maybe they were standing up!

 

[Cafeen]

Haha that is what I was thinking but I saw on some exif setting that it was at 50mm and the picture looked good! Maybe they were standing up!

It's doable, I shot some of my food porn last year with the nifty 50. But, you will need more space than normal. Standing up or moving plates across the table are a couple of the things that I was able to do to squeeze the stuff into the shot (or even just backing up my chair when it was appropriate to do so). Of course, I was also travelling solo, so this makes it a bit easier to shift stuff around.

Due to both the focal length, and the minimum focus distance of the nifty50, it's going to be a bit tough to get the entire plate into focus when it's sitting in front of you. Plus, that close, the DoF will be quite shallow (since it's a function of both distance and aperture) and you'd likely want to stop down a bit to get more into acceptable focus, which could make you lose the speed of the lens anyway, to the point where the 18-55 would work just as well, and allow you to capture a wider angle of view.

I specifically picked up my 30mm f/1.4 for my food porn and dark rides this year. I liked the 50, but it was just too tight for my liking since I'm primarily focused on using it at Disney (my non-Disney shots are primarily done with my 55-250 as you know ). It's a bit pricey, especially for what amounts to a specialty lens in relation to my standard shooting. But I'm sure it's going to help quite a bit. I just need to get out and practice with it a little... I've been lazy!

 

[NateNLogansDad]

A lot of people seem to be afraid of changing lenses. But honestly once you get a feel for your camera and the lenses you have you really won't be doing it that much when you're out and about. Some worry about dust... I've been using DSLR's for nearly ten years now and am not shy about changing lenses. Nor do I go out of my way to take any extra precautions to keep dust out, I just use common sense. I have never had a problem with dust on my sensor. And I live in north central Texas where it's dry and very dusty most of the year. Now I have dropped a lens. It was my own stupid fault for not taking the time to slow down. But taking the time to change lenses when you do need to is just part of owning a DSLR. In my opinion if you never want to change lenses you'd probably be far happier with a super zoom or something like the new Sony RX100.

Because of this post, and this post alone,I just threw my camera in the trash and picked up an iphone. I'm sure I'll be happier