Are these lenses redundant for my needs?

dgr88 wrote:

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

and/or

Sigma 18-250 mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM

A little background - I bought the original Rebel shortly after it was released. I was just starting to move along the DSLR learning curve when my first child was born 11 years ago, went back to the ease and portability of a point and shoot.

Now I'm about to revisit the dslr and purchase the 70D in advance of a family trip to Costa Rica. As it happens, I'm also about to start filming a series of work-related training videos for YouTube, so I'm factoring this into my purchase decisions as well.

After researching lens options for our Costa Rica trip, I decided to put the Sigma 18-250 mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM on my list. I want to avoid changing lenses while on the trip if possible, so this seems to be the best middle ground for convenience and image quality.

With the addition of video capability, however, the 70D kit lens - the Canon 18-135 mm f3.5-5.6 STM - has stood out as a superior lens.

Is it overkill have have both lenses? I know that I want the Canon for it's video capabilities, but would it also serve me well on my trip if I decided to forgo the Sigma? I have the budget to buy both, but certainly do not want to spend more money unnecessarily.

Any guidance would be appreciated. I'm also open to other lens suggestions within the same price orbit as the two above.

Thanks!

Yes, definitely redundant.  If you have to switch lens for that extra reach of 250mm, get the Canon 55-250 STM IS instead.  I have it and its IQ is close to that of L lenses, AF is super smooth and quiet. STM lenses are the best for video, even better than L lenses with USM.

It is very light, both on weight and your wallet.  Someone reported it can be had for $109 from the US Canon e-store refurbished site.

BTW, do consider the Canon 10-18mm IS STM lens too.  It is also very light and affordable.  Very good IQ for a budget ultra-wide angle lens.

Do you intend to take pictures of very far off subjects? If so, additional reach may be handy. But I agree with the prior poster, go for the 55-250 IS STM for those occasional shots. The 18-135 STM should do the trick for the majority of your shots. Also, as the prior poster said, you may benefit more from the 10-18 IS STM than the additional reach beyond 135mm.

Having been to Costa Rica twice, I feel like I can confidently say that unless you have a lot of experience spotting wildlife, or you have a guide, you will rarely need 250 and if you do, you'll need more like 1000mm.

Thanks for the advice. It definitely makes sense.

I'm curious. Exclusive of the lenses I originally posted about, will I get any worthwhile results by using my original 300D kit lens (18-55mm) if I just kept it on my camera for spur of the moment, every day shots? Is it worth even keeping it around?

dgr88 wrote:

Thanks for the advice. It definitely makes sense.

I'm curious. Exclusive of the lenses I originally posted about, will I get any worthwhile results by using my original 300D kit lens (18-55mm) if I just kept it on my camera for spur of the moment, every day shots? Is it worth even keeping it around?

If I remember correctly, that wasn't even an IS lens, right?  If so, I don't know enough about the optical quality of that lens to comment but I'd guess that the fact that it lacks IS is enough for you to keep it at home.

If I'm not remembering correctly and it's the EF-S 18-55mm IS lens, then from about 18-40 ish, you'll get equal or slightly better results.  Towards the long end of the 18-55, the 18-135 will outperform it.

Thanks! Very helpful and educational input! I just ordered the following from B&H:

-Canon EOS 70D DSLR Camera with 18-135mm STM Lens and Printer Kit
(Great rebate offer that put this camera/lens combo on top price-wise AND included a printer that will conveniently replace the "dead" model that I rely upon for non-photography related projects. Definitely a win for me!)

-Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Lens

I think I'm all set.

tatslau wrote:

dgr88 wrote:

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

and/or

Sigma 18-250 mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM

A little background - I bought the original Rebel shortly after it was released. I was just starting to move along the DSLR learning curve when my first child was born 11 years ago, went back to the ease and portability of a point and shoot.

Now I'm about to revisit the dslr and purchase the 70D in advance of a family trip to Costa Rica. As it happens, I'm also about to start filming a series of work-related training videos for YouTube, so I'm factoring this into my purchase decisions as well.

After researching lens options for our Costa Rica trip, I decided to put the Sigma 18-250 mm f3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM on my list. I want to avoid changing lenses while on the trip if possible, so this seems to be the best middle ground for convenience and image quality.

With the addition of video capability, however, the 70D kit lens - the Canon 18-135 mm f3.5-5.6 STM - has stood out as a superior lens.

Is it overkill have have both lenses? I know that I want the Canon for it's video capabilities, but would it also serve me well on my trip if I decided to forgo the Sigma? I have the budget to buy both, but certainly do not want to spend more money unnecessarily.

Any guidance would be appreciated. I'm also open to other lens suggestions within the same price orbit as the two above.

Thanks!

Yes, definitely redundant. If you have to switch lens for that extra reach of 250mm, get the Canon 55-250 STM IS instead. I have it and its IQ is close to that of L lenses, AF is super smooth and quiet. STM lenses are the best for video, even better than L lenses with USM.

Couldn't agree more on the recommendation of the 55-250 STM IS as a travel lens.  Light, affordable, and IQ will be noticeably better than the Sigma.

Mark

Why would one recommend the 55-300 over a shorter reach lens when both the posters lenses start at 18mm ?

Only the owner can tell us if they are redundant..!

On one hand, the 270mm reach out does the 135mm...right ?  Do you use the is reach, or will the 135 reach do the job ?

And finally, which one produces better pictures ?

Put the pros and cons on a piece of paper...do you OWN homework and tell your self which one to keep..!

Mike

Take a second look. I said the 18-135 plus the 55-250 was an option. Not solely the 55-250.