Replacement lens

No one lens will 'do it all'. But if you say what part of 'it all' you are interested in you might get some suggestions.

Assuming that you want a zoom, what would you like to improve compared to your dead lens?

The usual combination that people want but can't (for any money) get is a zoom lens with a wide range and a really large aperture.

If you can give us an idea of how long and how wide the zoom needs to be, that will help. Describe what you shoot at each end of the range.

Do you want to shoot indoors without a flash? A cheapish zoom is generally not the best choice.

Anything else you can think of?

Oh I wish I can give you answer to this as I am COMPLETE beginner I have no clue.

Most of my pictures are of my children outside playing, posing etc. Yes I do some pictures inside. I rarely do any vistas pictures. I completely understand that there is not 1 that could do it all and I am nowhere to even trying to understand this right now.

Yes I would like to have autofocus. I had the very basic 18-55mm lens and it did the trick, but not sure if I should replace it with this one again.

EAT said:

Hi,

I am complete beginner (mom shooting pics of the kiddos). I have Canon T3-i with the basic lens it came with EF-S 18-55 mm. And I dropped it I believe the lens is broken.

Is there a lens that would do it all? Or should I get 2 different ones. Really I am beginner and would like to learn more, but that looks like I might have to wait a decade to be able to (3 kids under 5)., but in mean time I want to capture the family moments as they will not come back.

And please budget friendly. I am not planing to spend $1000 and more on one lens.

Thank you, I appreciate your help guys!

Click to expand...

I take it you dropped camera AND lens. Lens may be indeed broken, but before you go spend money on just the new lens, I suggest you find someone who also has a Canon DSLR, and try their lens on your body. Make sure everything works properly - that the camera powers on, focuses, takes pictures, the pictures look good, flash works, screen works. If you find that your body is also damaged, it is likely not worth repairing. However, if you contact Canon customer service, you may be able to get a discount on a replacement camera by sending in your broken one (called Canon Loyalty Program)

If body is indeed damaged, I would recommend this kit: T5i with 18-135 STM lens. There is a caveat, however: this is a Canon refurbished product, at $840, and there will be also tax and shipping. However, if you get a good 'loyalty' discount for your old camera, it may be worth it. Otherwise, you can buy same exact kit from B&H, brand new, for $900, no tax unless you are in NY, and free shipping.


Now, if body appears to work fine, the lens I would recommend most is EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM. $550 new from B&H, or $440 refurbished from Canon. Check with their customer service, maybe they got loyalty program for lenses as well? You can also get in on eBay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-EF-S-...78089123?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item19f49ca5a3 Only $315, seller looks reputable enough.

There is really no 'do it all' lens - which is why systems with interchangeable lenses exist. With every lens, you get some, you lose some. However, 18-135 is a darn good all-rounder, giving you a lot more reach than the 18-55. At longer end (85mm+) it can yield very nice shallow depth portrait shots. STM means much faster/quieter focusing, and the lens will be optically better than your old one as well. It should serve all your needs until your kids start going into large field sports - then you can add the 55-250 or even 100-400 to your kit.

For indoors, I highly recommend getting an add-on flash. There are very affordable third party options like Yongnuo.

Thank you for your reply. I have already set up meet with someone to pop on lens on my camera.I hope the body is still good.

Thank you for the lens tip. That is exactly what I was looking for.

My Camera is still taking pictures, they are just fuzy

There is no do-it-all lens. Lenses have many properties, which is why there are many lenses. The three most basic ones are:

• Focal length. How far it zooms (both out and in)
• Aperture. How much light it lets in. This is also related to being able to blur the background.
• Image quality.

There is an engineering trade-off between those three. For example:

• If you get an 18-135mm, it will be similar to the kit lens for aperture and image quality, but give a lot more zoom.
• If you get a Canon 15-85mm, it will have a little more zoom than the kit lens, excellent image quality, but not let in any more light.
• If you get a superzoom (e.g. 18-200mm or 16-300mm), it will be like your kit lens for low light, give much more zoom, but much worse image quality.
• If you get a Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 zoom, it will let in more light and give better image quality than your kit lens, but not have any extra zoom.
• Etc.

Now, mind you, all of those (perhaps with the exception of the superzoom) will make a good walk-around lens -- in other words, they're all good for doing most of it. To do it all, you perhaps need 2-3 lenses, wisely chosen. But a good walk-around is probably good enough for now, and you're still much better off with one good lens than multiple mediocre ones.

So how do you decide? Well, how was the kit lens limiting you? If there wasn't enough zoom, get a 15-85mm or 18-135mm. If you were missing low-light shots, get the 17-55mm. Any of those are sensible choices. And if you're on a budget, get another kit lens.

As a footnote, my personal preference is either the 15-85mm or the 17-55mm. 15-85mm is a very versatile range. 85mm is nice for portraits. 15mm is pretty wide. Conversely, the 17-55mm is nice for low-light shots. Both have great reputations for image quality (although, as a disclaimer, I haven't personally used the Canon version of those).

Fuzzy could be the lens (most likely), but it could also be the lens mount. Cameras are precision objects with super-tight tolerances. Being off by a fraction of a millimeter can kill them.

EAT said:

My Camera is still taking pictures, they are just fuzy

Click to expand...

You mean, taking pictures with its original lens? What mode do you mostly shoot in? Full auto? Depending on the focusing mode selected, camera will usually not take a shot unless focus confirmation is achieved. If camera does take fuzzy pictures when you press the shutter, the problem could be as simple as on-lens switch accidentally having been switched to 'MF'. Make sure that the switch is on 'AF' and that stabilisation is ON. Does the lens TRY to focus when shutter is half-pressed? That is, any observable movement? Can you turn focus ring easily? (don't force it!)

Yes it is in AF mode. I tried to switch it back and forth. It makes the sound, but does not focus at all. I do not see the squares I would see if all OK.

and yes I can turn focus ring very easily. I took it of and make sure it is aligned and clean (as much as I can see) but still no change

EAT said:

Hi,

I am complete beginner (mom shooting pics of the kiddos). I have Canon T3-i with the basic lens it came with EF-S 18-55 mm. And I dropped it I believe the lens is broken.

Is there a lens that would do it all? Or should I get 2 different ones. Really I am beginner and would like to learn more, but that looks like I might have to wait a decade to be able to (3 kids under 5)., but in mean time I want to capture the family moments as they will not come back.

And please budget friendly. I am not planing to spend $1000 and more on one lens.

Thank you, I appreciate your help guys!

Click to expand...

While no one lens will do it all, the Canon 18-135 EF-S STM is a very good all-purpose lens. Good for general scenics as well as family photos. Not long enough if you wanted to do any nature/birding photos, but then you're into the $1,000+ catagory anyway.

EAT said:

and yes I can turn focus ring very easily. I took it of and make sure it is aligned and clean (as much as I can see) but still no change

Click to expand...

Just to be sure, I am not talking about the wide, rubbery zoom ring, but a very thin, barely usable ring in front of the lens. (maybe a total of 4mm wide) If it turns freely with switch set to AF,it does look like something is broken in the gearing that engages focusing assembly. When you look through viewfinder and turn the focusing (not zoom) ring, do different parts of scene get fuzzy/focused? Can you manually bring subject into focus and take a sharp picture?

Sorry to hear about the drop. One of my biggest fears!

As far as a "do it all" lens, you may want to look at one of the newer superzooms, such as the Sigma 18-250 Macro OS or the Tamron 16-300. I know many bash the superzoom lenses saying they have worse Image Quality than the basic "kit" lenses, like your 18-55. I have a T3i and it came with the kit 18-55 and 55-250. I do own many other lenses, but I also recently bought the Sigma 18-250 Macro OS lens. It sells for around $350 new.

I compared it at similar focal lengths to my kit lenses, and at certain lengths, the Sigma was much sharper. The main reason I bought this lens, especially since I already have those lengths covered by other lenses, is that I wanted a "walk around" lens solution. There have been times when I am carrying my camera, but am stuck with only one lens (on the camera). With the 18-250, I get a much better focal range.

This is just a thought. Also, I do recommend the Canon 18-135 STM as well.

*If you do replace the 18-55 with the same lens, be sure to get the newer STM version as it has a faster, quieter focus, and reportedly sharper images.

I have double checked and it is for sure the lens. Still not sure what I wanted to get.I would really like to get the EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM but over my budget. Well - not worth to spend money for my simple shooting. The old lens did what I need to do now.

Abes of main has this one as a white box (imported version), which I think the warranty is little different. I am not sure if it would be even worth to look at or just get the basic kit lens I had before.

What do you guys think about those?

In your situation I would probably get the 55-250 which goes for about $250, so good enough for when the kids are around you as well as when they are further away and you want to catch that special moment...

I would also look at the 40mm 2.8, simply because it's tiny, cheap (I've seen it for as low as $150) and good, so the overall package is small; at some point most of us think lugging around a full on camera is a hassle, and with that lens it becomes much more practical - you should try it in store first, it's a prime lens so it only has one single focal length, as opposed to a zoom, but the results can be amazing...

EAT said:

I have double checked and it is for sure the lens. Still not sure what I wanted to get.I would really like to get the EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM but over my budget. Well - not worth to spend money for my simple shooting. The old lens did what I need to do now.

Abes of main has this one as a white box (imported version), which I think the warranty is little different. I am not sure if it would be even worth to look at or just get the basic kit lens I had before.

What do you guys think about those?

http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?...8135OB&l=PLA&gclid=CNK_6O_MscECFeHm7AodD1wA3w

Click to expand...

NO!! STAY AWAY from them!!!



You may notice they also sell the regular version of this lens for $500, which is what others sell it for. Either this is a gray-market, or most likely used that they push off as new. Or, they will take your money and then start feeding you bull about how they are actually out of stock and won't you upgrade to the 'regular' $500 version. Or they will 'accidentally' send you a wrong lens, and good luck exchanging.

You are far better off finding a used lens on eBay, from a well rated seller, than dealing with these scammers.

scorrpio said:

EAT said:

I have double checked and it is for sure the lens. Still not sure what I wanted to get.I would really like to get the EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM but over my budget. Well - not worth to spend money for my simple shooting. The old lens did what I need to do now.

Abes of main has this one as a white box (imported version), which I think the warranty is little different. I am not sure if it would be even worth to look at or just get the basic kit lens I had before.

What do you guys think about those?

http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?...8135OB&l=PLA&gclid=CNK_6O_MscECFeHm7AodD1wA3w

Click to expand...

NO!! STAY AWAY from them!!!

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/homeowners/abes-of-maine.html

http://www.yelp.com/biz/abes-of-maine-edison

You may notice they also sell the regular version of this lens for $500, which is what others sell it for. Either this is a gray-market, or most likely used that they push off as new. Or, they will take your money and then start feeding you bull about how they are actually out of stock and won't you upgrade to the 'regular' $500 version. Or they will 'accidentally' send you a wrong lens, and good luck exchanging.

You are far better off finding a used lens on eBay, from a well rated seller, than dealing with these scammers.

Click to expand...

Yep that is what I thought! I think I researched this option when I was buying camera.

EAT said:

Oh I wish I can give you answer to this as I am COMPLETE beginner I have no clue.

Most of my pictures are of my children outside playing, posing etc. Yes I do some pictures inside. I rarely do any vistas pictures. I completely understand that there is not 1 that could do it all and I am nowhere to even trying to understand this right now.

Yes I would like to have autofocus. I had the very basic 18-55mm lens and it did the trick, but not sure if I should replace it with this one again.

Click to expand...

My 50D came with the old 28-135, which is a beast! Too heavy to carry around all day, but the longer end of the zoom can be nice outdoors. So I think the 18-135 would be a good pick for outdoors. If the STM is over budget, the original 18-135 costs less. Also not as sharp, you can look up sample images for this lens online to see if the results are good enough for you. The 55-250 is plenty sharp, if you don't mind a 2-lens setup.

Due to the weight of the 28-135, I also picked up the usual 18-55. Super light, by zoom lens standards, which is nice for an all day mission. Modest aperture means using flash indoors. Of course the need for flash also applies to a 28-135 or 18-135.

Next I got a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for the extra aperture. Mine is the cheaper non-IS version, still works very well. Found mine used for a little over $300, a bargain for these specs. Image is good, AF is good, and the weight is still well under the old 28-135. I do like the brighter aperture, so this is now my favorite walkaround lens, by far.

For very close copy work I still use the old 18-55. For playing paparazzi I still use the old 28-135 for its extra reach. But I don't yet have a 55-250. When I do get around to the 55-250, that will retire the old 28-135.

Parts of this ramble may or may not apply :-D

Kelly Cook

I have just [today] bought a Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS. [the OS is Sigmas "Optical Stabilization] I had a few choices, such as the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 [no OS & expensive & £650+] The Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4, therefore not constant aperture but goes to 70mm & has OS, but more expensive than the 17-50. Canons own 17-55 f/2.8, can't remember if it had IS, but it also was 2x the price of the Sigma 17-50. I am happy with the choice I made, it may not be the Rolls Royce of its class, but is the best value for money for my uses. I paid £300. New.