Question on General Purpose Lenses


summerbirds

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
5
0
0
Hello all! Newbie reporting, with a question on general purpose lenses.

Recently, I purchased a 500D body with the 50mm f1.8 lens. This lens is amazing, but it seems slightly limited when it comes to general purpose/walkabout photography. So, I am thinking of getting another lens to complement my 50mm. :D

I have several options:
1. Get a 2nd hand kit lens (18-55 IS)
2. Get a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
3. Get a Sigma 17-70mm.

At first I did not get the kit lens as I heard reviews that it cannot exploit the full megapixels of the 500D to the best of its abilities, and wanted to go for a lens with better IQ. However, I would like to ask how do the IQ of Tamron and Sigma compare to the kit lens? Is it worth it to get Tamron/Sigma given its relatively higher prices as compared to the kit lens? Plus which lens will be able to complement my 50mm best?

If you all have any other suggestions, please do tell me! :) My budget is under $700, including 2nd hand/3rd party lens. Thank you! (Pardon my lengthy post xD) :)
 

the 28-300 or 18-200 from Sigma/Tamron can do the job if you are looking for an all rounder.
 

thanks for the recommendation, may i know why didn't u recommend canon 18-200?
pardon my noobness, is 500d EF or EFS-only?
 

Last edited:
thanks for the recommendation, may i know why didn't u recommend canon 18-200?
pardon my noobness, is 500d EF or EFS-only?
the budget constraint.

500d can use both.
 

Welcome to CS
 

IMHO, the 17-50 can do most of what you need as a starting photographer. It will likely outresolve the superzooms too, and superzooms do make you somewhat of a lazy photographer. I started off with the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 and it's a wonderful lens to use as a beginner.
 

Hello thanks for all your recommendations and welcomes! :) How would the image quality of tamron 18-200/canon 18-200 compare with the kit lens? Is there a very huge difference?

How about the canon 17-85mm?

Thanks!
 

Hello thanks for all your recommendations and welcomes! :) How would the image quality of tamron 18-200/canon 18-200 compare with the kit lens? Is there a very huge difference?

How about the canon 17-85mm?

Thanks!
First of all, how discerning are you with regards to image quality, that you can tell the difference between an image taken by a superzoom, and one taken by the sharpest lens available (eg. a prime)?

For example, do you think you can tell the difference if someone uses a 50mm f/1.2L @ f/8, vs your 50/1.8 @ f/8, vs a kit lens (18-55, set to 50mm) @ f/8, vs an 18-200 @ f/8, do you think you can tell the images apart? If not, I wouldn't worry so much about 'image quality', and find a lens with a suitable focal range, aperture and price.
 

First of all, how discerning are you with regards to image quality, that you can tell the difference between an image taken by a superzoom, and one taken by the sharpest lens available (eg. a prime)?

For example, do you think you can tell the difference if someone uses a 50mm f/1.2L @ f/8, vs your 50/1.8 @ f/8, vs a kit lens (18-55, set to 50mm) @ f/8, vs an 18-200 @ f/8, do you think you can tell the images apart? If not, I wouldn't worry so much about 'image quality', and find a lens with a suitable focal range, aperture and price.

I agree with what you have said. Perhaps in my mind, what I am thinking of is that I want to make a worthy investment from the start.
I guess its really a balance between IQ, suitable focal range, aperture and price that I am looking for, and eventually its cost effectiveness. But having said that, I recognise my less discerning eye compared to the seniors, hence I would not get something top of the range that I can't fully utilise. :)

Thanks for your valuable comments, and for everyone else's. I really appreciate all the help!! :D I think eventually I would get the tamron, till I become better! :)