Please help - choosing my next lens

[Lyric]

Warning: I am a SLR novice. I'll do my best to not sound completely inane, but no promises have been made. I bought a Canon EOS 30D a couple years ago with the intent to "grow into" it. I use it quite a bit, but my technical knowledge on how to use it (and how to express what I am looking for) is still lacking.

Anyhow, people seem to have 3-4 lenses which they recommend for others starting out in the hobby. I have two decent lenses and am now seeking advice on where to go from here!

Right now, I have 3 lenses:
- Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro
- Canon EF 70-200MM f/4.0L USM Zoom
- Canon EFS 18-55mm (the kit lens)

I rarely use the kit lens. Maybe it is just me, but the quality really seems to be lacking. I love the 70-200mm, but it gets really bulky after a while. The 50mm macro is really fun to use, but I want something a little more versatile for vacations (DISNEY!) and quick jaunts around my region.

My usual photos consist of a mixture of:
- Portraits (both indoor and outdoor)
- Macros of flowers, insects, etc.
- Landscape/scenes

My budget is fairly small right now so I can't afford a real high-end lens. At the same time, I am hoping there are some really solidly built lenses out there that put out a good quality photo and would complement what I already have. I really can only afford, at most, $500/lens. Because of this, I realize some things are just going to have to wait.

Looking at what I already have, and looking at what I enjoy photographing, where would you suggest I go from here?

Side tangent: I know even less about external flashes. At the same time, it's becoming apparent that it would be a good purchase to make. Can anyone recommend a decent-quality external flash as a starter?

Thanks in advance for your help, and I do apologize for starting another "help me!" thread. I tried reading through the threads already in existence, but didn't quite find what I was looking for.

 

[ukcatfan]

If you dislike the kit so much, I would look for something in that range that is f/2.8 through the range. You will miss out a lot at WDW if you are spending most of your time at a 50mm or longer focal length. Another WDW worthy lens is the inexpensive 50mm f/1.8. While it is not much different from the 50mm you have, that extra speed will make a difference on dark rides.

 

[jfinke]

The new kit lens is supposedly better optically + it has IS. You can find it for $120 used.

The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II can be found for $400.

 

[DizzyV6P]

I had the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 before I sold it to a friend to make room for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Both are great lenses. I just wanted a wider lense

If you have money to blow, the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS is the king of this area. It's ONLY $950.

Otherwise, there's the Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina versions of the 17-50 f/2.8
Plus the new "kit" lense.

Flashes: Canon 430 EX II or Canon 580 EX II ($239 and $329 on Amazon.com)

 

[Lyric]

Thanks for the replies- I'll be looking into all your suggestions.

 

[DBL101]

If you like the Canon 70-200, you might want to take a look at the Tamron 18-270. It's not nearly as bulky or heavy as the Canon zoom because it doesn't have the same quality glass. It still seems to be getting good reviews and can be had for about $550 after rebate. I've been using the 18-200 for a number of years and am thinking of upgrading to this lens. It's longer and has image stabilization

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/tamron_18-270_3p5-6p3_vc_n15/

 

[Groucho]

If you're comparing your kit lens to the 70-200mm F4 and a macro lens, then you shouldn't be surprised that you're not seeing the same kind of quality.

Before I read the replies, my first thought was "Tamron 17-55mm F2.8", just like others have said. I have the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 (for sale in Pentax mount if anyone is after one! ) and it's a quite good lens, not quite on the level of the best OEM lenses but optically very good. Considering what the OEM comparable lenses cost, it's a bargain! I switched to the factory 16-50mm and it's about twice the price (hence the need to sell the Tamron!), and most other OEM ones are even pricier.

If you like the Canon 70-200, you might want to take a look at the Tamron 18-270. It's not nearly as bulky or heavy as the Canon zoom because it doesn't have the same quality glass.

Technically speaking, it's not the quality of the glass that makes it heavier, it's that it's a faster lens, so uses more glass. I think the 70-200mm is metal, also, and generally uses more sturdy (and hence more expensive) components. But I think great glass weighs the same as lousy glass.

 

[Lyric]

If you're comparing your kit lens to the 70-200mm F4 and a macro lens, then you shouldn't be surprised that you're not seeing the same kind of quality.

Not surprised, just ready to upgrade. I chose those two lenses with the intent to upgrade, and bought the 30D with the kit lens because I knew I couldn't afford another lens immediately.

Thanks again for all the recommendations! You have all been extremely helpful. I'll have to do some lens shopping after Christmas -- maybe some after-Christmas sales will be nice to me!

 

[SIFORD'S LOVE WDW]

I'm sure that many people will not agree, but have you considered a Canon 17-40 f4L ? They can be found used, at around the $500 area. I use it on a
20D and LOVE the results. My last trip to WDW, in May of 2008, I used it exclusively, and I'm very happy with the results. The color and sharpness of this lens, impressed me since the very first image. Many people feel as though it is of limited use on a crop body, but although it is not an ultrawide on a crop body, I feel ,that it is truly an excellent lens, and feel that the range works very well on a crop body.

 

[Lyric]

I have done quite a bit of thinking on this, and am leaning towards buying one pricier lens rather than two less expensive lenses. It seems like this would be a better long-term investment. I think I will also hold off on buying an external flash as well, at least for the time being. Let me know if this is not a smart thing to do!

The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS is actually really tempting me. I am a little concerned about it not being weather sealed, but other than that it sounds really good. The 2.8 f/stop is very appealing, as is the IS. I didn't even mention IS being something I was interested in, but I have a small tremor that this could really help with.

Anyhow, this is where I am leaning right now. Please let me know if you have opinions/misgivings, and thanks once again for all your tips and opinions!