# Lens suggestions for T3i please!



## TracieD112 (Sep 28, 2013)

Hello all! My wonderful husband bought me a T3i as a gift, and he has no idea about camera bodies and cropped sensors. Im going to keep this body and one day move up to a full body. Im not to sure which lens to get next! I have the canon 50mm 1.4( I love for portraits), and now I am looking for lens that will be great for portraits / family/ engagement photos that will work good with my cropped sensor and work great when i get my full body. Any advice would be most helpful!! 

Im leaning toward these lens: 
24-70mm L 2.8
28-70mm L 
24-105mm 
Any suggestions would be wonderful since I am really new with exploring new lenses!! 
Thank you!!! -Tracie-


----------



## bholliman (Sep 28, 2013)

24mm on a crop body camera is equilant to 38mm on a full format camera. A nice focal length, but not very wide. If you plan to stick with APS-C for awhile, I recommend the EF-S 15-85 or 17-55 2.8. Both are L quality optically and will be wide enough for landscapes and group shots.


----------



## pensive tomato (Sep 28, 2013)

Hi Tracie, welcome to CR!

The first thing that comes to mind in your post is when do you think that you'll move to full frame and if you have any specific plans in that regard. Out of the lenses that you list, you may find them laking in the wide end in your cropped body. Also, it's not even clear to me if you even have the kit lens around, which could give you a clear sense of whether you'll miss the wider end. Depending on your situation, you may benefit from considering an EF-S lens, such as the 17-55mm f/2.8 (great IQ and very useful range, although not that long for some portraiture applications).

If that's not a concern, I think that the 24-105mm f/4 is a good option, it gives very nice IQ and reach in a cropped sensor, and there are good deals to be had. I also took it that you meant the 24-70mm f/2.8 mkI and not the latest mkII. The mkII has outstanding IQ, yet it lacks IS and carries a hefty price. I have no experience with the 28-70mm f/2.8. I understand it's an older lens, which preceded the 24-70mm L series (but you may already know that).


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 28, 2013)

I probably will not move to a full framed body for a while. I do have my kit lens  and still use it when i can not get a wide enough angle with my 50mm. I do mostly portraits and also I forgot to mention car photography so I have to stand waaay back at car shows. Ive read about the 17-55mm lens but a friend of mine kept telling me a 24-70mm ver1 is the best bet for wide angles??


----------



## Jim Saunders (Sep 28, 2013)

I have a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 that does awfully well for the sub-$300 (used) pricetag it had on it. It isn't USM so it makes a little bit of stepper motor noise while focusing, but on my crop body I don't mind that.

Jim


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 28, 2013)

I will look into that thank you!


----------



## pensive tomato (Sep 28, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Ive read about the 17-55mm lens but a friend of mine kept telling me a 24-70mm ver1 is the best bet for wide angles??



I'm not sure of what you mean here. The 17-55mm is of course wider than the other lenses you listed. My understanding also is that the 24-105 and the 24-70 mkI are comparable in sharpness at their wide end in a cropped sensor. Photozone.de suggests that the mkI has less distortion, although I don't recall having much problem dealing with distortion from the 24-105mm in post. I don't think there is much distortion to be concerned about with the 17-55mm at 24mm at all (a bit of pincushion according to PZ).

Others have suggested the 15-85mm, which is a great lens in my opinion. Very useful range if you don't need the larger aperture. I had it and only replaced it with the 17-55 mm later on (ever since I've moved to full frame). Also look at the Sigma 15-50mm f/2.8 if you want a cheaper alternative to Canon's 17-55 mm. From limited testing, I thought the Sigma was better than the Tamron VC equivalent, although I never tried the Tamron non-VC lens.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 28, 2013)

I have a 24-105 and it is good... borderline great. the 24-70s 2.8 are both great, but at the price, 660, the 24-105 is a ridiculous value. 

I used to contend that the 50mm f1.8 for 100, the 55-250 for 150ish and then eventually the 40mm for 150 were the best value, bang for your buck, lenses available for Canon. but the decline of resale value for new kit lenses is astonishing. 

having said that, maybe in a year the resale price is around 550. 


yes, f4 isn't ideal for indoors and also not on a crop, but you can use the money you save and get a very good speedlite, 430 exii, for around 250. learn how to bounce light off sidewalls, ceilings or use off camera flash, and you will likely have significantly better results than using an f2.8 lens, a higher iso, a slower shutter speed, and ambient light.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 28, 2013)

bholliman said:


> 24mm on a crop body camera is equilant to 38mm on a full format camera. A nice focal length, but not very wide. If you plan to stick with APS-C for awhile, I recommend the EF-S 15-85 or 17-55 2.8. Both are L quality optically and will be wide enough for landscapes and group shots.



I knew I might be looking to go full frame at some point and so the only ef-s lens I ever bought was a 55-250. I'm not a big landscape guy, but I fought it out in the crop world for almost five years before making the transition... and the only thing I needed to sell was my old 60d body. 

some people transition and they have a body, a macro lens, 60mm, a normal zoom like the 17-55 and a telephoto zoom like the 55-260 that all don't work on their new body. 

if you think a switch is possible... I say prepare for the future.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Hello all! My wonderful husband bought me a T3i as a gift, and he has no idea about camera bodies and cropped sensors. Im going to keep this body and one day move up to a full body. Im not to sure which lens to get next! I have the canon 50mm 1.4( I love for portraits), and now I am looking for lens that will be great for portraits / family/ engagement photos that will work good with my cropped sensor and work great when i get my full body. Any advice would be most helpful!!
> 
> Im leaning toward these lens:
> 24-70mm L 2.8
> ...


 
I think that you are wasting money buying FF lenses that are not the right focal lengths for a crop camera. You need something at least 18mm, preferably wider, which means a 17-40L or a 16-35mmL plus a 24-70 plus your 50mm plus a 70-200mmL. No matter how you cut it, the FF lenses do not match up well with a crop sensor and you spend a lot of $$.

I'd suggest a EF-S 10-22mm and a 24-70 plus a 70-200mml or 70-300mmL Then you can eventually sell the 10-22 and you will be set for FF. If you get a refurbished 10-22 lens when they go on sale, you can probably sell it at no loss when you go to FF. You likely will not need anything wider than 24mm on FF, so wait and see what focal lengths you need before buying a expensive super wide FF lens..

As soon as you get several people in a room and want a group photo, you will want that 10-22 very badly.24mm is not wide on a crop.

You should consider getting multiple flashes for lighting. Proper lighting is often overlooked, and you can spend a ton of money on lenses, but with poor lighting, your images will suffer. Don't use that tiny flash on the camera and expect high quality portraits.

Last, learn to use RAW. Get Lightroom or DXO or one of the other excellent raw processors. Then, you can reprocess your images over the years and take advantage of better image processing technologies. Your jpeg images are burned in and there is little you can do to improve them.


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 28, 2013)

Thank you everyone very much for your suggestions! I still have a bunch to learn. I do shoot in RAW and do most of all my portraits outside during the "golden hour". If I do shoot inside Im usually next to an open door or big window


----------



## barracuda (Sep 28, 2013)

Since you're looking for a lens that would be great for portraits/family/engagement photos, you want a lens wide enough to capture group/family photos, but you also want a lens long enough to capture portraits (head and head and shoulder shots) without that wide-angle distortion. Rule of thumb for portraits is 85-135mm, but of course your mileage may vary depending upon the level of creativity you like to introduce into your photography.

Another consideration is background blur, or bokeh. A blurred background will separate your subject from a distracting background and make your subject stand out. So in this regard, you'd want a lens capable of wider apertures and longer focal lengths. Both of these attributes make background blurring easier.

So given the list of lenses you're considering, my vote would be for the 24-70 f/2.8 as that gets you:

1. Wide-angle (though perhaps not wide enough on a crop body).
2. Longer focal length (112mm on a crop body).
3. Wide aperture. While the background blur is not the same on a crop body vs. full-frame, it's the widest-aperture zoom available (except for the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM). Wider apertures also give you better low-light capabilities, especially for moving subjects when flash isn't available.

The 17-55mm f/2.8 is also a good choice for your crop body. Canon dropped the price of this lens by around 15% in the last month or so. When you move to full-frame you can simply sell it for 60-80% of what you paid for it, if not more. The aforementioned Sigma is also an option, though you may find yourself needing a longer focal length.

When you do move to full-frame you may want to supplement your stable of lenses with an 85mm or 135mm lens as well...

Good luck and have fun!


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 28, 2013)

Thank you very much!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2013)

barracuda said:


> . Rule of thumb for portraits is 85-135mm, but of course your mileage may vary depending upon the level of creativity you like to introduce into your photography.


 
That rule of thumb is for FF bodies, divide by 1.6 for her crop, so ed 50-85mm equivalent on a crop. That 85mm is a number that works for both, so its a good choice for both crop and FF as is the 50mm lens. you can, of course use much longer focal lengths for portraits, but I'd hold off on anything over about 100mm at first.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 29, 2013)

The 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2.0 are great bright fast focusing lenses that will give you more reach and also work very well on 135mm/ leica / minature format. Modestly priced too.

If you have a wider leaning then something like the old 35mm f2.0 is a cheap addition and will work well as a standard lens on your T3i or a fast medium wide on a future larger sensor body.

If you want the flexibility of a zoom then get the EF-s 17-55 f2.8. Pick up a used version thats clean and you'll get most of that money back when you upgrade your body.

Buy lenses for the camera you are using now, not the one you'll be using in a few years, expecially the general zooms. This is a range you need, the 24-70 f2.8 is a costly way of selling yourself short.


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

Im really glad I asked these questions before I spent over a $1000 bucks! I think the 17-55 f 2.8 lens might win! Thank you again everyone!!


----------



## pensive tomato (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Im really glad I asked these questions before I spent over a $1000 bucks! I think the 17-55 f 2.8 lens might win! Thank you again everyone!!



Best of luck with your purchase! Remember that there's always renting for trying before you buy. Also you can supplement your general use zoom with a couple of primes down the line, those will work just fine when you move to full frame.


----------



## mkabi (Sep 29, 2013)

Let me add my 2 cents.

Just to let you know, the 17-55 won't work on a full body. Should be pretty obvious given the EF-S designation.

As someone that has a crop body myself, I would choose a 17-40 f/4 L or 16-35 f/2.8 L.
I mean you're 50mm is like an 80mm, right.... so you are already experiencing that close-up look.

When I had the kit lens... I barely moved from 18mm, because it had everthing I needed to cover landscape pictures.


----------



## barracuda (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Im really glad I asked these questions before I spent over a $1000 bucks! I think the 17-55 f 2.8 lens might win! Thank you again everyone!!



If you do decide on the 17-55 f/2.8, you should know that this lens is notorious for dust getting into the front element. While consensus is that it won't affect your photos, I couldn't stand seeing it. I had mine cleaned twice by Canon (free if you're a CPS Gold/Platinum member) until I put filter on it. Since then, no dust. Get a high-quality, multi-coated, clear filter (UV isn't necessary for digital cameras). I only use B+W filters.

This B+W filter has a low enough profile such that you should not see any vignetting and has front threads for your lens cap:

http://www.adorama.com/BW77XSP7N.html

Enjoy!


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

Very true, I really hate having to stand really far back with the 50mm but i love it for newborns and toddler portraits. I know i wouldnt be able to use the 17-55mm on a full body, but I wont be upgrading to a FF anytime soon.  I do need to find a place to rent a lens and get a feel for what I like. Any suggestions on lens rental places??


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

Also Thank you Barracuda for that tip!!


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Very true, I really hate having to stand really far back with the 50mm but i love it for newborns and toddler portraits. I know i wouldnt be able to use the 17-55mm on a full body, but I wont be upgrading to a FF anytime soon.  I do need to find a place to rent a lens and get a feel for what I like. Any suggestions on lens rental places??



I haven't used either, but lensrental.com or borrowlenses.com seem reputable.

I never bothered because shipping seems like too much, but if you have some place local, that would be cheaper.


----------



## EchoLocation (Sep 29, 2013)

24mm is absolutely not wide enough on a crop body. I was in your position years ago and bought a 24-105 and the 10-22 to go with my t2i. 
It was a huge mistake(i have since learned that 24mm is one of my favorite focal lengths,) and I ended up switching back and forth between my 2 lenses constantly... it was very annoying and actually convinced me to move to Full frame much earlier than I otherwise would have.
I might consider even looking at an old 5D mark I camera body if you like FF. This camera takes amazing portraits. the iso and AF are not up to the 5DIII standards, but I believe for portraits or in good light it is 97% as good most of the time, and I think you can buy one on Craigslist for 700 bucks.
You could buy the 24-105 used and the 5D for 1500 dollars(possibly more or less.) I think this is much, much better than the 10-22 and 24-70(or 105) on the APS-C body.
or, if you want simple, just get the 17-55 2.8 or the 15-85 if you don't need the 2.8. This lens is really good and is the right lens for your situation. That is the lens that is supposed to be used as a step up from the kit lens on crop bodies. I wish I had just bought that instead of the 24-105 on my t2i.
I don't believe the 24-XXX zooms work well on APS-C bodies at all and I hated using mine on my old T2i.
I also think either of the wide angles mentioned earlier are fine too, the 17-40 F4 or 16-35 f2.8, but probably not as useful on the smaller sensor as the 17-55 2.8.


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

Yea I noticed they are pricey, and we don't have anything local here


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

Oh okay, I really don't want to get a new body only because the fact my husband bought it for me as a gift and I really hate to make him feel bad. So I am going o use it for awhile then Ill move up . Thank you!!


----------



## RAKAMRAK (Sep 29, 2013)

@OP, get the 17-55 mm f/2.8. I read your first post and given your requirements this is the best lens that you can get. If you wanted the best walkaround lens for your current camera I would suggest the 15-85. Get the lens that best suits the camera that you have right now, not for the camera that you may or may not have in 3 years from now. I have tried to use lenses longer than 50 mm - outside they are fantastic, but inside the house/room they are useless - just too long.

If I was confident about the quality then I would suggest you to get the new Sigma 17-70mm (to get the relative best of both worlds). But have not used this lens myself, and do not know what its optical quality is.


----------



## jdramirez (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> Oh okay, I really don't want to get a new body only because the fact my husband bought it for me as a gift and I really hate to make him feel bad. So I am going o use it for awhile then Ill move up . Thank you!!



I was on a crop for about 4.5 years... there isn't anything wrong with crop. And for what you shoot, you really don't need a big upgrade. Maybe a 5D mkii or 6D provided your photographing interests don't change too much. And by then, they may be 1 or 2 generations behind... so you can get a good condition used one at a reasonable price. 

I don't disagree with the advice to get a lens that is suitable for what you have right now... but I went the other way and I can at least explain why. First, I don't like variable aperture. If you are shooting in manual, zooming from 15mm to 50mm will make a big difference in your settings provided you are shooting wide open. So if you lose 1/2 your light (3.5 to 4.8), then you have to kick up your iso, or slow your shutter speed. 

But that isn't an issue if you get the 17-55 which has a constant aperture. I'm not sure if you plan on buying new... Amazon and others are selling them for around 880 right now and that is a heck of a deal, but if you plan on reselling that lens in a few years, it isn't as easy as you might hope. I sold one on Amazon for $740... and that is when the new price was $1060. With the dust issue, with it being out of warranty, with it simply being used, the lens is a challenge to sell. I fully presume the price will go up and 880 isn't a long term price, but it is something to factor in because most lenses don't lose much value... but the 17-55 is a bit of an exception... though in full disclosure, the 24-105 was selling at 1100 for a while new in a retail box, and now you can get new lenses without a warranty for $660. And the resale of the same is maybe $550, so that is about 1/2 of it's value provided you paid full retail 2 years ago. 

So just be aware of resale values... because what you have is a living breathing commodity that holds its value. The lenses and body. Point and shoot cameras... they are practically disposable. But I bought my XS, the 18-55, and a 75-300 and after 1 year I sold the lens and after 2 years I sold the body. I sold them for practically exactly what I paid (I actually made $15 bucks). I did lose some money on a 60D and on a 24-105, but that shouldn't have been a big surprise. Though if I did buy a 24-70 f/2.8L, I wouldn't have lost nearly as much, if anything at all (because I buy like new refurbs or like new used). So I did err and it hit me in the pocketbook.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 29, 2013)

@jdramirez

Agree with a lot of above.

My advice was to buy a used clean 17-55. They are around, and it's already taken the biggest value dip that it's going to, so when, if you do upgrade, you shouldn't lose too much.

As said, nothing wrong at all with cropped sensor. The T3i can turn out great results, especially with nice glass.


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

I have seen some 17-55mm for about $600-700 but they look alittle rough . So I am not to sure if its worth getting a new one and taking real good care of it with a filter or just wait till a nice one comes around.


----------



## sandymandy (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> I have seen some 17-55mm for about $600-700 but they look alittle rough . So I am not to sure if its worth getting a new one and taking real good care of it with a filter or just wait till a nice one comes around.



Rent one and see if u can still wait for a good price after u gave it back


----------



## barracuda (Sep 29, 2013)

TracieD112 said:


> I have seen some 17-55mm for about $600-700 but they look alittle rough . So I am not to sure if its worth getting a new one and taking real good care of it with a filter or just wait till a nice one comes around.



Canon started instant and mail-in rebates on several lenses today. The 17-55 now has an instant rebate and can be had for around $829. Several stores have 4% rewards on top of that, so the effective price is around $795. Now is a great time to pick one up!

http://www.adorama.com/CA1755U.html?emailprice=t&sub=cpw-12951632&utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid62259

Good luck!


----------



## TracieD112 (Sep 29, 2013)

OH awesome!!! thank you!!


----------

