# Upgrading lenses for college student



## collegetech (Jan 24, 2015)

Hey everyone! I am college student on a very limited budget. I currently shoot with a Rebel XT and its original 18-55mm kit lens. I recently sold one of my old film cameras and a very slow 28-90mm lens. I plan on purchasing a 50mm 1.8 with that money. I was also thinking about selling my kit lens and buying a used EF 28-105 http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28-105mm-3-5-4-5-Standard-Cameras/dp/B00004YZQ8
Or buying a used EF 28-135
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00006I53S/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_1?pf_rd_p=1944687462&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B00004YZQ8&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0KNZYNKJHD1ERYPWQQWX
I am not sure if this is a good idea or not, I do not have a lot to spend and I figured these lenses are probably better quality then my kit lens. I tend to shoot a lot of landscapes. I will use my 50mm 1.8 as my portrait lens. My work can be found here: http://photographsbystevenrussell.pixieset.com/russell/ It is important to note that I also currently have a 80-200mm EF lens, however I do not used this much. Maybe I could sell both the kit and 80-200mm for something better?


----------



## Jim Saunders (Jan 24, 2015)

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC) was good to me, even if the zoom ring goes the wrong way and it hums a little when it focuses. Also I saw an article here about a Samyang (?) 50 f/1.8 which sounded competitive with the Canon one. I tried a 28-135 briefly, I didn't see any reason to complain.

If you're near a camera store, try a few different lengths and see if there are any different focal lengths you like that you don't have.

Jim


----------



## steepjay (Jan 24, 2015)

Nice portfolio on your website, Steven.

Your lens musings on a tight budget seem pretty reasonable, the 50/1.8 is a very useful lens.

If you're looking for the best image quality on a really tight budget, I would personally stick to primes for now. 24/2.8 would be in reach of your budget as well. This is if you're not shooting in an environment where quickly changing focal lengths is a big concern. If you're looking for ultrawide, the sigma 10-20 is out there under $400, not sure if that's within reach but probably better price than any other single focal length shorter than 24.


----------



## FTb-n (Jan 24, 2015)

There are lots of options to consider. The XT was my first DSLR and you may want to consider a body upgrade. The T2i and up have 18 MP sensors based on the 7D. It's huge improvement over the XT, especially at higher ISO's. It's not a bad idea to consider lenses first, but keep you eye out for a good deal on one of these bodies.

As for lenses, I'd be more inclined to consider the 40 f2.8 pancake and the 85 f1.8. You have some great shots on your site and I think these two lenses will give you more creative control over your images than another slow zoom. The creative advantage lies with the opportunity for thinner DOF and sharper lenses. These two lenses are likely to be a better long term investment. 

I suspect that the 28-105 and the 28-135 will be short-term lenses. My bet is that you'll want to replace these in the not too distant future with something like the 17-55 f2.8 (IMHO the best "normal" zoom for crop) or the 15-85 f3.5-5.6. The latter is very sharp, but too slow for my tastes.

Anyway, back to the 40 and the 85. The 40 is a stop slower than the 50 1.8, but it's much sharper corner-to-corner. It focuses quicker and quieter than the 50 and is similarly priced. I think it's a more useful focal length for crop.

On a full frame body, the 40 and 50 compare to 64 and 80 mm lenses. The 50 would be a better focal length for portraits on a crop body, but the 40 is a much better lens and more useful for other subject -- including group portraits.

For individual portraits, I prefer the longer lenses. I use the 70-200 on FF for portraits and often work within longer half of its range. The 85 f1.8 will give a FF equivalent of 136 mm which many consider to be the ideal portrait focal length. Plus, it will offer more pop with thinner DOF than the 50 mm lens. Of course, your taste and style may differ from mine, so consider this accordingly.

The-Digital-Picture.com is a great resource for lens reviews and image quality comparison tools.

Look at Canon's online refurbish store for good deals with factory warranty. Also look at CanonPriceWatch.com to find the best price for new or refurbished lenses and bodies.

Good luck with your search for your next lens.


----------



## nc0b (Jan 24, 2015)

I had two 28-135mm lenses have the IS fail. One was purchased new and the other one came with a 40D I wanted. Those are the only Canon lens failures I have ever had. Even though some people bad mouth the 24-105mm L lens, I find it a fine walk around lens on a FF body. Unless I am reach limited, I shoot my 6D or 5D classic about 85% of the time over my two crop bodies. No plans for any additional EF-S lenses. My 15-85mm is fine outdoors, but too slow when racked out on the long end indoors. Would not buy it again but cannot sell it for enough to warrant getting rid of it. My wife uses it on a 60D outdoors and when taking photography classes. It takes good pictures if there is enough light.


----------



## gigabellone (Jan 24, 2015)

First of all, i really like your pictures, the long exposures in particular.
To be honest, when i first started with my first dslr (550D/T2i + 18-55 IS II) i loathed the kit lens too, but then i realized it takes serious money to get something better. I would say stick to it. It's good enough if you use it at narrow apertures (f/5.6 and smaller). I wouldn't recommend the 28-135 either, because 28mm can be too tight on an apsc sensor (if you wonder what the difference between aps-c and full frame is, check here). My first lens after the kit was the 50/1.8 from canon; for the money, nothing beats it: it's got good sharpness and a quite large aperture. Keep in mind that its autofocus system, while reasonably accurate, is slow and noisy. Some months ago Yongnuo launched a knock off of this lens that sells for barely 2/3 of the price of the canon. The reviews seems good, you might consider it. If you really have an itch for a new toy, i would consider either a Canon 10-18, a brand new ultrawide zoom with good quality and reasonable price, or, if you are into portraits, a couple of flash with remote triggers and light modifiers. Sorry for the long post, i hope it'll help you make your mind!


----------



## sulla (Jan 24, 2015)

I owned the 28-135 lens a long time ago, but I didn't like the build quality too much. But IQ was good. I can recommend it, if a used 24-105L is out of your reach. On an APSC-body both might be too long, however. There are not really better budget wide-angle alternatives available. I would stick with the kit lens, if this is acceptable.

IQ of the 50 1.8 is not good until f/2.8 or f/4. I would recommend you try the EF 40 2.8 STM for portraits instead and the EF-S 24 2.8 STM for wider shots. Both lenses offer professional grade image quality (better than the 24-70 2.8 II (!!)) at a tight budget and are much much faster than your kit lens.

You didn't ask for it, but if you need something on the long end, you could go for a EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM. It is dead cheap and has good IQ as well. If you can get a used 70-200 f/4 L (with or without IS depends on budget) it would be better, naturally.


----------



## wyldeguy (Jan 24, 2015)

steepjay said:


> Nice portfolio on your website, Steven.
> 
> Your lens musings on a tight budget seem pretty reasonable, the 50/1.8 is a very useful lens.
> 
> If you're looking for the best image quality on a really tight budget, I would personally stick to primes for now. 24/2.8 would be in reach of your budget as well. This is if you're not shooting in an environment where quickly changing focal lengths is a big concern. If you're looking for ultrawide, the sigma 10-20 is out there under $400, not sure if that's within reach but probably better price than any other single focal length shorter than 24.



I'm with steepjay, the canon EF-S 24mm f2.8 pancake is only $150 on B&H right now and since you like landscapes that is a pretty decent lens at a reasonable price.


----------



## wyldeguy (Jan 24, 2015)

If you sell the 18-55 and use that as extra cash you might consider the new EF-S 10-18 stm for landscapes. I am not 100% that older cameras are compatible with stm focus tech but I'm sure someone here will correct me if I'm wrong. B&H has it for $300.

I see someone else has recommended it as well in this thread. I've been considering it myself.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 24, 2015)

I've had a Rebel XT. Not recommend 28-105mm or 28-135mm to not offer some important viewing angles.
If you do not really use your 80-200mm should sell it.

I will suggest two different options:
* Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 + Canon 55-250mm STM.
* Canon 18-135mm STM


----------



## wsmith96 (Jan 24, 2015)

I understand photography on a budget and also agree that small primes may be the best way to extend your buying power. Check into the 24 and 40 pancake lenses.

Since you are doing a lot of landscape/architectural shots, you also may want to consider the 10-18 ef-s lens, or the older 17-85. I think you will notice the missing width of your 18-55 if you swap for the 28-105.

I hear that the tamron 17-50 f2.8 is an excellent lens. I don't know what they go for though.

Good luck and let us know what you decide to get.


----------



## Yankeedog (Jan 24, 2015)

I think getting a 50mm f/1.8 as your very next step is a good idea, especially if you want to do portraits on a crop sensor as the XT. The wider prime options mentioned here like the 40mm f/2.8 are great inexpensive lenses, but they are a little wide for portrait work unless you really want to focus on wider, 3/4 or full body portraits.

You may want to consider the new Yongnuo 50mm f/1.8 rather than the Canon, though. Most reviews I've seen indicate that it's at least as good as the Canon, and it's $30-40 cheaper new.

I'd get the 50mm prime first and play with it a bit before deciding upon your next purchase priority; a lot depends on what and how you like to shoot and working with a bright prime will teach you things about your shooting style.

Looking at your photos, I don't think you are going to want to give up the 17-28mm range so I'm skeptical that swapping the 17-55mm for a 28mm-xxx will be good choice for you. If you decide that you do want a longer zoom, the aforementioned Canon 55-250mm is a good budget option; it's a remarkably good lens for the price. But if you currently have an 80-200m and find you aren't using it much, I wonder how much you really need a zoom with long tele range right now. If long tele isn't a priority for you, selling the 80-200mm and 17-55 to get something like a 17-85mm might be a good option as this will give you a somewhat higher quality zoom with a bit more range. Primes are great, but sometimes you really want the flexibility of a zoom to take advantage of unexpected opportunities.

Or, after playing with the 50mm f/1.8 you may find you really like working with bright primes and decide that you want to get another prime before you upgrade your zoom -- once you have the 50mm, the 24mm f/2.8 is a good option if you like shooting wider. Or if you want to go the other way, you can save your pennies for the 85mm f/1.8, which is a bit more expensive but is definitely a very good lens for the price.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Jan 24, 2015)

I would avoid the 28-105 or 28-135 because neither is wide angle on your Rebel. If you shoot landscapes, you'll miss the 18mm focal length your current lens offers. I agree with the suggestion for the EF-S 10-18mm. STM is compatible with your XT. I've shot with the 10-18 on a 20D, which is slightly older than your camera. But since you're talking about selling your kit lens to do this upgrade, you could instead upgrade to the newer 18-55 STM lens ($100). The optical formula and build quality is far better than the kit lens on the XT. One step above that would be the 18-135. There's a newer STM version that is even better image quality ($300), but the original ($120) is very good, much better than the 17-85. 

Personally, if I were building an inexpensive kit, I'd start with the 18-135 STM, then add the 40mm pancake instead of the 50mm 1.8 (40mm is slower but more flexible as a walk-around prime on a crop sensor than the 50 and has a more robust feel for roughly the same price). Then I'd add the EF-S 10-18mm for ultra wide angle, then the 24mm pancake for a wider angle prime. This means only two filter sizes: 52mm and 67mm. This whole lens setup runs $800 with good deals; less if you buy used.


----------



## ecka (Jan 24, 2015)

Best budget lenses:
EF-S 18-55 IS STM
EF-S 55-250 IS STM
EF-S 10-18 IS STM
EF-S 24/2.8 STM
EF 40/2.8 STM
YN 50/1.8


----------



## dak723 (Jan 24, 2015)

I'm going to give you a bit of a different take. The results of higher priced lenses depends a lot on what you are doing with your final product. I recently bought the new SL1 with a newer version of the kit lens. I had the original 18-55 kit lens and the newer STM version is definitely an improvement. I believe the IS II version was also improved over the original kit. I recently shot the same scene with the SL1 and kit and the 6D with the 24-105mm L lens. On a 1280 x 1024 monitor and printed at 8" x 10" on an Epson photo printer, there is virtually no difference. I have showed the prints to two people and neither could tell which one was taken with the FF and L lens. So, you may find that the kit lens is quite good enough! Perhaps selling yours and buying a newer version of the kit lens on ebay is a possibility. I agree with those who think that the other lenses you mention (28-105 or 28-135) won't give you a wide enough angle on a crop camera. I also don't think (my opinion only) you will see any difference in IQ.

If you do want a older, cheaper lens (less than $100 on ebay) then I would recommend the Canon EF 28-70mm 3.5-4.5 II. 

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR1.TRC0.A0.H0.Xcanon+ef+28-70mm+3.5-4.5+II&_nkw=canon+ef+28-70mm+3.5-4.5+II&_sacat=0

I would consider the IQ to be equal the 24-105 L lens on a crop camera. Since it does not go very wide, I would keep the kit lens. I used the combo of a kit and this lens for years with my original digital rebel.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 24, 2015)

Finding a supurb lens on a budget can be tough. The 28-105mm is one of those, the 80-200 is not. I've found all of the lenses used that I mention below for $125 or less (Mostly Less).

Upgrading the original 18-55mm lens to the newer 18-55mm IS version is a big upgrade for little cost.

If you can find one of the older 70-210mm f/4 lenses, they can be a good deal.

I have a Tokina 17mm f/3.5 prime that I bought on the cheap, and found it to be excellent.

If you are willing to manual focus, there are a number of Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, etc lenses that can be adapted with good results.

28-XX mm is not a good focal length range for a crop body, so I'd recommend passing it up.


----------



## collegetech (Jan 25, 2015)

Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions! I was able to read through all of them and have a lot to process on what I should do. Right now I am all of the place and am now considering a used 17-40 F/4 L or a used 24-105 F/4 L IS. I think the 17-40 would be better for me right now because I enjoy landscapes, however being at only F/4 scares me and think the IS would be a nice feature. After much research my end goal is the new 16-35 F/4 L IS, what a nice lens for a landscape photographer! However I can purchase the 17-40 for almost have the price used. Does anyone have any experience with any of these lenses? I like the prime ideas, however I fill it it a bit limited for and I may just keep it at the 50mm 1.8 for the time being. Again, thank you for your responses to my thread!


----------



## wyldeguy (Jan 25, 2015)

I have the 17-40 and since you will be using it for landscapes the f4 won't be an issue. I use mine all the time. It's a great lens. The 16-35 f4 is is supposed to be even better overall.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 25, 2015)

wyldeguy said:


> I have the 17-40 and since you will be using it for landscapes the f4 won't be an issue. I use mine all the time. It's a great lens. The 16-35 f4 is is supposed to be even better overall.


 
Check out a site like photozone to compare lens performance. The 18-55mm IS and the STM models have outstanding performance on a crop, better than the 17-40. The 17-40 fares better on FF than crop.

So, you can do extremely well with a low cost lens.

If you want f/2.8, a 17-55mm EF-s is extremely good, and used prices match the 17-40. But notice, the 18-55mm IS is sharper, and at the edges, its amazing.!


----------



## e17paul (Jan 25, 2015)

collegetech said:


> Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions! I was able to read through all of them and have a lot to process on what I should do. Right now I am all of the place and am now considering a used 17-40 F/4 L or a used 24-105 F/4 L IS. I think the 17-40 would be better for me right now because I enjoy landscapes, however being at only F/4 scares me and think the IS would be a nice feature. After much research my end goal is the new 16-35 F/4 L IS, what a nice lens for a landscape photographer! However I can purchase the 17-40 for almost have the price used. Does anyone have any experience with any of these lenses? I like the prime ideas, however I fill it it a bit limited for and I may just keep it at the 50mm 1.8 for the time being. Again, thank you for your responses to my thread!



I have owned the 50/1.8, and replaced it with the 50/2.5 macro. This week I tried a 50/1.4 belonging to a colleague and was impressed. It also seems to focus significantly closer than the claimed 45cm. 

If the 16-35/4L is your long term wish, then Mt Spokane's suggestion of the 18-55 STM might be the way to go now, releasing some budget for a better 50 (faster, better AF) that remains with you for the long term.

Alternatively to a 50, the newer 40 STM reviews well, as does the 24 STM. However, neither will give the degree of subject isolation that can be had from the 50 1.8 or 1.4

I appreciate the budget juggling dilemma. It never goes away, the numbers just get bigger when you go from a student budget to a wage earner's budget.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jan 25, 2015)

I would say go for the 50mm it has a lot of problems but I loved it when i first got it. You can find it used for about $80-100 if you don't like it. You can sell it again. I also brought 28-105 for my t2i when i was poor too. I liked it but I think I liked the look on my camera. I would suggest upgrading to a newer stock lens or 18-135. I have seen those cheap local.


----------



## bholliman (Jan 25, 2015)

I also suggest a hard look at a 18-55 IS or STM these are terrific lenses that you can pick up really cheap used. The fairly new 18-135 STM is a somewhat more expensive option with a nice zoom range. The STM is a big improvement over the IS version - I owned both. 

Canon has really upgraded their 18-xx(x) EF-S lenses from previous versions. They are optimized for crop bodies and often outperform much more expensive EF lenses on a crop. Unless you plan to buy a full format body in the near future, I strongly recommend sticking with EF-S lenses. If you are interested in UWA, the 10-18 is awesome.

For a fast prime, you might look at the new Youngno 50 1.8 which is cheaper than the Canon nifty 50 and reportedly better optically.


----------



## collegetech (Jan 25, 2015)

Hey everyone! Last night I purchased a 50mm 1.8, however it’s the Mark I version NOT the Mark II. I paid about $150 for it, and I bought this lens over the newer model because of the high quality construction of it. It may be from 1980, however I plan on keeping this lens for a very long time and I don't care to put a cheap plastic lens on a 6D or any other FF camera when I get it. In regards to my current 18-55mm (this is the original one they came out with) I plan on selling it and buying a new (used) STM version of it for about $110. After reviewing the testing documents that were on some replies it looked like a good deal for me. For now I will use that lens and it will not cost much because I will sell the old one. I am still not sure what I should do with my 80-200mm lens, I was thinking about still buying the 28-135 IS lens. So I would sell the 8-200 and with the exact amount purchase the other lens, I think the 28-135 is higher quality and it has a more usable range for me as a landscape photographer. So in the end I will end up with an 18-55 STM, 50 1.8 Mark I, and a 28-135 IS. I still have a film a camera so the 28-135 can be used on that as well since it is EF. The 28-135 purchase can still change if there is a better used EF lens for about 200-$300. Once again thank you for all of the replies!


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 25, 2015)

collegetech said:


> So I would sell the 80-200 and with the exact amount purchase the other lens, I think the 28-135 is higher quality and it has a more usable range for me as a landscape photographer. So in the end I will end up with an 18-55 STM, 50 1.8 Mark I, and a 28-135 IS. I still have a film a camera so the 28-135 can be used on that as well since it is EF. The 28-135 purchase can still change if there is a better used EF lens for about 200-$300. Once again thank you for all of the replies!


I've had Canon 28-135mm and do not recommend it for APS-C cameras current. Several years ago I used this lens on a camera EOS300 (analog) and digital Rebel XT (8 megapixel) with good results. But in my Rebel T2i, this old lens shows its weaknesses with a 18 megapixel sensor.

I know some undemanding people who like the 28-135mm pictures in an original 5D (12 megapixel), but not in modern cameras.


----------



## WIDEnet (Jan 25, 2015)

As a college student with a limited budget myself, who started out with a 550D, kit lens, and some old manual primes, I can certainly relate to your situation. Your plan sounds like a fairly solid one, but I have a few suggestions. I personally owned the 50/1.8 I (bought used for $99, sold for $150 a year later) and certainly preferred it to the junkier Mark II, but to be entirely honest if you sold it and bought the optically superior Youngnuo version, you'd save around $100 and to be honest, I'd probably last longer since the newest 50/1.8 I is around 25 years old. But that's up to you. 

What I do strongly recommend though is skipping the 28-135 and getting the 55-250 IS instead; while the build quality might not be as good and you loose a little focusing speed, the IQ should not be and it is smaller, lighter, better IS, and ultimately the focal length range is much more useful and complements your 18-55 IS much better, and you save around another $100 depending on where you buy.

Finally, you might want to consider the 18-55 IS over the STM version. The optics in the former are according to most sources just as good if not slightly better, and STM, while slightly quieter, isn't usually reputed to be that much faster than a typical micromotor, and you loose out on any benefits of it since you are using it with such an old body anyway, and save another $40 or so.

Why am I suggesting you save all this money? If you make at least one or two of these swaps, that will more than take care of the costs of a used 550D (Rebel T2i) body, which will likely be worth far more to you then any minor things you loose out on, and you gain a number of benefits with the above substitutions as well. Your 350D will go for up to $100 or perhaps a little less, and the 550D costs $250 right now at Adorama, leaving you with about $150 or so to make up in price difference. And if you really want to keep the Mark I and STM, if you say your budget is $200-300 and you bought the 55-250 instead, you'd still have $200 left over which would more than make up the difference to pay for the 550D body. 

Trust me, it will really not disappoint; you get so, so much in exchange. That camera is close to the best you can get in terms of IQ in a crop-format Canon, and it will last you well into your photographic journey whereas the 28-135 will, as others have said, almost certainly not. Plus, if you save by way of my other suggestions, you can start saving up for that sweet 10-18 STM, and once you have that you'll be pretty much set for any sort of photography outside of highly specialized areas.

Whatever you choose, best of luck!


----------



## collegetech (Jan 26, 2015)

A lot of good ideas here! I was actually thinking today that replacing my body may not be a bad idea. If I can sell my body for $150-$200 then I'd have some money. I was thinking the XSi, t1i or the 40d. I do a lot of backpacking so I ddon't think the better build quality of the 40d would hurt. I am also really wanting a live view! I think the t1i may have slightly better specs though. I think I'll skip on the 23-135.


----------



## WIDEnet (Jan 26, 2015)

Thanks! Unfortunately, considering I bought my sister a 450D for $150 in like E- from Adorama and that was about a year ago now, I highly doubt you'll get more than $100 for your 350D. But I highly recommend getting the 550D like I did if you are serious about photography and really want to take advantage of your lenses, while getting good low-ISO performance too. You do get a build quality and external control advantage with the larger body, but that also equates to being larger and heavier too--a real disadvantage for backpacking. And while I have dual 7Ds now I was never disappointed with the durability of my 550Ds; I wasn't putting them through hell and back after all though I did do plenty of hiking and running around with them. I kinda miss the weight off my shoulders now, with 2x gripped 7D and 17-5/2.8 IS + 70-200/2.8L IS as my usual kit!

On the other hand, you get a good deal better image quality, both resolution and high-ISO performance. You are only going to end up paying about $50 more than the 500D (or the 40D) for the pinnacle of Canon crop-frame IQ, at least until the 70D/7D2, so you'll only need to step up from there once you want to go full-frame, or are shooting lots of action. Plus, you get video and Magic Lateran full support with the 550D which besides its well known video features improves still shooting considerably--I consider Live View virtually useless without it. ML is especially invaluable for landscapes with its ETTR, RAW Histo/Zebras/Spotmeter, and particularly its Dual-ISO module which can give you something close to D8xx-level dynamic range, with some post-processing and a few small caveats.

So the 550D would be my recommendation. But the 500D isn't so bad either considering you still get some limited ML support, which can even enable video on there and some of the features I described. But ideally, go for the 550D and you certainly won't regret it for a while. I sure didn't!


----------



## LovePhotography (Jan 26, 2015)

Get that new Chinese version of the 50 1.8 that threads here have been talking about for the last 2 months. Its $40 cheaper and a better lens than the 1.8.
Really like your website. Proof you can do a lot with a little!


----------



## collegetech (Mar 1, 2015)

just an update for everyone in this thread. I have found my solution to my lens problem: more hours. I picked up more hours from my campus job. So far I have saved $450, this is with out selling any gear yet. I am going to purchasing that sweet 16-35 f4. Its the lens I wanted and it will be my first L glass... it will be sweet! I want to avoid the whole buy sell thing if I can. I will buy a 6d this summer. The 135 will be next for portraits And I'll keep my 50 for in between.


----------



## bholliman (Mar 1, 2015)

collegetech said:


> just an update for everyone in this thread. I have found my solution to my lens problem: more hours. I picked up more hours from my campus job. So far I have saved $450, this is with out selling any gear yet. I am going to purchasing that sweet 16-35 f4. Its the lens I wanted and it will be my first L glass... it will be sweet! I want to avoid the whole buy sell thing if I can. I will buy a 6d this summer. The 135 will be next for portraits And I'll keep my 50 for in between.



Sounds like a great plan! The 16-35/4 IS is an excellent lens.


----------



## Luds34 (Mar 2, 2015)

FTb-n said:


> There are lots of options to consider. The XT was my first DSLR and you may want to consider a body upgrade. The T2i and up have 18 MP sensors based on the 7D. It's huge improvement over the XT, especially at higher ISO's. It's not a bad idea to consider lenses first, but keep you eye out for a good deal on one of these bodies.
> 
> As for lenses, I'd be more inclined to consider the 40 f2.8 pancake and the 85 f1.8. You have some great shots on your site and I think these two lenses will give you more creative control over your images than another slow zoom. The creative advantage lies with the opportunity for thinner DOF and sharper lenses. These two lenses are likely to be a better long term investment.
> 
> ...



+1

I too like the idea of passing on the slow normal zooms and picking up a prime or two instead. The 85 f/1.8 is a very excellent choice. The 40mm is not a bad one either, although f/2.8 I find a bit too slow for a prime. It's real advantage in my mind has always been that it is a pancake lens is obviously small, light, etc. But I agree the pure IQ on that lens is superb!


----------



## Luds34 (Mar 2, 2015)

Jim Saunders said:


> The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC) was good to me, even if the zoom ring goes the wrong way and it hums a little when it focuses. Also I saw an article here about a Samyang (?) 50 f/1.8 which sounded competitive with the Canon one. I tried a 28-135 briefly, I didn't see any reason to complain.
> 
> If you're near a camera store, try a few different lengths and see if there are any different focal lengths you like that you don't have.
> 
> Jim



The Tamron 17-50 is another good choice. I think the price of this lens has significantly fallen (since I purchased it) and I'm sure could be had for very cheap on the used market. This was my first "real" lens I bought and it served me well. I moved to primes very quickly but this lens was used on my first trip to NYC, the first time I brought a DSLR into the BWCA, my daughters first trip to my alma mater, and served me well when I used it. I've now handed it down, along with my T2i to my wife.


----------



## Luds34 (Mar 2, 2015)

bholliman said:


> collegetech said:
> 
> 
> > just an update for everyone in this thread. I have found my solution to my lens problem: more hours. I picked up more hours from my campus job. So far I have saved $450, this is with out selling any gear yet. I am going to purchasing that sweet 16-35 f4. Its the lens I wanted and it will be my first L glass... it will be sweet! I want to avoid the whole buy sell thing if I can. I will buy a 6d this summer. The 135 will be next for portraits And I'll keep my 50 for in between.
> ...



That is an excellent lens! With glass like that I will echo others that you may want to upgrade your body as well.


----------



## kheldhren (Mar 2, 2015)

collegetech said:


> just an update for everyone in this thread. I have found my solution to my lens problem: more hours. I picked up more hours from my campus job. So far I have saved $450, this is with out selling any gear yet. I am going to purchasing that sweet 16-35 f4. Its the lens I wanted and it will be my first L glass... it will be sweet! I want to avoid the whole buy sell thing if I can. I will buy a 6d this summer. The 135 will be next for portraits And I'll keep my 50 for in between.



Indeed... when the budget constrain seems too harsh on the options, finding a way to change the budget is the way to go. And at the rate the prices of the 6D are moving, Canon FF is getting much more accessible all the time. Keep us posted on your photo exploits!


----------

