Requesting assistance from experienced EF-S lens owners

Hello all. Thank you for taking the time. I promise I googled this question before posting...

I have a T4i with the 18-55 STM. I love this lens but I want to upgrade to something that is better (useability, IQ). I primarily shoot stills, but I do like to shoot videos to document trips (casual use). I am trying not to focus on lens weight and build quality so much.

The lenses I am looking at are

Canon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM. Less than $300 new on ebay. I would sell 18-55 STM if purchased.

Canon 55-250 f/4-5.6 STM. Less than $200 new on ebay. I would keep 18-55 STM if purchased.

Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 "C" (the updated version). Less than $400 new on ebay. I would sell 18-55 STM if purchased.

I am leaning towards the 18-135 STM because it will let me use one lens. But since it is a superzoom, is there noticeable falloff in IQ compared to the 18-55 STM? If there is, is it substantial to the point where this lens would be unwise to purchase?

The 55-250 STM seems like a very nice addition as I would still be able to use my 18-55 STM, but I am not super excited about changing lenses. However if the 18-135 STM has poorer IQ than the 18-55 STM, I would rather buy the 55-250 STM.

Now the elephant in the room is the Sigma 17-70 "C". On paper it seems awesome but reviews show that its a bit soft wide open at 17mm, and results are best when stopped down. But is this lens worth the price over the other options if I have to shoot at a higher aperture?

You can compare lens performance at the-digital-picture.com. Great resource.

Cheers,
GT

With a mail in rebate, and around 550$, the Tamron 16-300mm would be tough to pass.
During a photowalk, a participant had brought this lens & the IQ was quite decent.

Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 OS HSM at $519.00 is quite a bargain too.

Hi, try to give them a try before you buy. My view would be that the first real upgrade in IQ will be noticeable when you move to 24-70 f2.8 L (which is not EF-S). I haven't personally seen 24-70 f/4 IS but it might be worth giving a look as well. Minimal IQ upgrades you may see in some other lenses would not be worth the money to me.

He is asking about EF-S lenses.

FOV of EF 24-70mm may not be wide enough for the OP. Think about it.

I also checked lens rental sites but its a lot more expensive than I would like. I think I will just have to bite the bullet. Thank you all for your valuable input.

I'm in the same boat as you.  I recently bought a 60D and gave my T3i to my wife.  I bought a Sigma 18-250 DC OS Macro (new version) for the T3i but have used it on my 60D, and I have been impressed with the quality.

As far as the lenses you mention, I'm debating personally for lenses for my 60D.  I am leaning heavily towards the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 C.  Like you said, it gets great reviews, but for little more, the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 gets stellar reviews.

Pair that lens with the 55-250 STM and you have 2 very good lenses.  The 55-250 STM has been getting glowing reviews as well.

Also, don't hesitate to check a reputable used dealer, like KEH.com.  They are highly recommended, and I've used them numerous times with excellent results.

Finally, you may want to also consider the Canon EF-S 15-85mm.  Very sharp lens with a great focal range.

Hi the 18-55 STM and 55-250 STM combo is the sharper option for STM lens not that the 18-135 STM is bad but its not quite as sharp as the 18-55 STM and 55-250 STM i have tested all these lens many times the 55-250 STM is very sharp even at 250 !!

MY pick for 1 lens with very good IQ is canons premium 15-85 lens giving you a range of 24-136 mm

With a 17-55mm f2.8, I wonder how u recommend the 15-85mm over the 17-55mm f2.8

They are simply in different leagues in terms of IQ in whatever way one puts it.

I had the 15-85mm on my 7D.  I did not say IQ is the only thing. At the same time, IQ is important. It helps in composition in a lot many ways. 18-135, 18-200 they all have their compromises.. typical.

The tests I have seen show the 15-85 equal or better than the 17-55 where they overlap and of course the IQ of a 15mm or 85mm shot is non-existent on the 17-55. Have you seen differently?

Of course I have seen it differently. The corners of the 15-85mm were not as good as the 17-55mm.
The CA & distortion on the 15-85mm are bad compared to the 17-55mm.
And the 15-85mm doesn't give the 4 stop IS that is mentioned as the specification. Would love to be proven wrong if someone finds it to be a 4 stop IS lens.

To me what worked as positives were the 15-85mm is the 15mm wide angle, the IS & the fast auto focus.

The 15-85mm lens is often oversold in this forum just because someone owned it.

Hi i do infact own both the 15-85 and the 17-55 2.8  the reason i suggested the 15-85 is the fact they were talking more about the larger zoom ratio lenses If you want the versatility of a 24-136 mm lens its gives the best IQ available within that zoom range ..I also agree that the 17-55 is a little sharper on the edges (not the Centre) and off course its 2.8 so if you ultimate IQ then go for the 17-55 2.8 !!

jwb1 wrote:

Hello all. Thank you for taking the time. I promise I googled this question before posting...

I have a T4i with the 18-55 STM. I love this lens but I want to upgrade to something that is better (useability, IQ). I primarily shoot stills, but I do like to shoot videos to document trips (casual use). I am trying not to focus on lens weight and build quality so much.

The lenses I am looking at are

Canon 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM. Less than $300 new on ebay. I would sell 18-55 STM if purchased.

Canon 55-250 f/4-5.6 STM. Less than $200 new on ebay. I would keep 18-55 STM if purchased.

Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4 "C" (the updated version). Less than $400 new on ebay. I would sell 18-55 STM if purchased.

I am leaning towards the 18-135 STM because it will let me use one lens. But since it is a superzoom, is there noticeable falloff in IQ compared to the 18-55 STM? If there is, is it substantial to the point where this lens would be unwise to purchase?

The 55-250 STM seems like a very nice addition as I would still be able to use my 18-55 STM, but I am not super excited about changing lenses. However if the 18-135 STM has poorer IQ than the 18-55 STM, I would rather buy the 55-250 STM.

Now the elephant in the room is the Sigma 17-70 "C". On paper it seems awesome but reviews show that its a bit soft wide open at 17mm, and results are best when stopped down. But is this lens worth the price over the other options if I have to shoot at a higher aperture?

This needs to be a sticky:

(Not in this order) IQ, price, weight, focal length, zoom or prime, speed, build quality, Canon or 3rd party, stabalization, suitability for video - all are variable compromises in lenses that have to be researched and considered as to how they relate to your situation. Asking a large variety of people on a website each with different needs, often trying to justify their own purchases will probably not be that productive.

The OP
- gets to know few more lenses that he/she already knew. For e.g. 18-35mm f1.8 from sigma.
- gets to know if there are promotions going on which might help him/her to opt for a lens with a little stretch in the budget.
- the OP gets to know other factors like warranty/guarantee which plays a part.

Damoo wrote:

The OP
- gets to know few more lenses that he/she already knew. For e.g. 18-35mm f1.8 from sigma.
- gets to know if there are promotions going on which might help him/her to opt for a lens with a little stretch in the budget.
- the OP gets to know other factors like warranty/guarantee which plays a part.

I'll give you that. But asking about lenses with different qualities and compromises is not. The must research the lenses features, figure out his needs, and balance the two.  What's good for one user is not good for another.