WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

I am very green to dslr photography. How I came to begin the obsession is a long story
The short version being Dad had a stroke and his camera, that I purchased for him, began to collect lots of dust. During the long process of setting up a viewer for Dad to enjoy, without becoming frustrated by hitting a wrong key, I began to want to save some of the images we often see. This led to aquiring his equipment.
Next thing you I'm reading everything I can find on DSLR photography and reaching for the next great shot.
I'm working with a Canon T3i with two zoom kit lenses and a Sigma 120-400.
I guess it inevitable that I would quickly be tempted to begin upgrading. It seems that the T3i is more than adaquet for my needs for a long time to come
The kit zooms 18(?)-55 &55-270(?) so Ok And the Sigma also does a good job. I'm trying my best to avoid upgrade for upgrade sake.
I shoot alot of birds, some sunsets and seascapes. A lot of candid grand kid amd family shots. Im really still trying to figure out where my photographic interests will take root.
I have to believe, because of my bird art background, from long ago, that wildlife and birds in particular will continue to hold a secure spot in my picture taking.

I think, for now, for birds and wildlife, the Sigma 120-400 should serve me well. Granted I could do better or go longer but I'm still learning
It's under the 200 5mm Mark that I'm thinking of beginning my lenses upgrading
This will be a slow process. I intend to buy on the better side of the curve and there are financial considerations
But buying quality is always money well spent
Hearing the call of the nifty 50 I'm thinking of a canon 1.8 50mm for the candid grandkids and family shots. Might, might go for the 1.4. The 1.2, in less I found a great deal is a little too rich for my skill or my use
I'm very slow at changing lenses, bum right hand and elbow, another long story.
I'm looking for suggestions, real recomendations really, for some zooms to fill in under the Sigma in the range of 50ish - 250ish

All recommendations will be much appreciate.
Thanks
Bill

ejones0310 Loc: Tulsa, OK

Bill, I have been looking at the 50mm family of lenses as well. Take a look at Ken Rockwell's lens reviews. I think you will find that the 50mm f/1.4 to be the best bang for the buck.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/index.htm#50

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Thanks very much for the link. There is some great information there. . I am a little confused by your suggestion that Ken thinks the 1.4 a better value. He actually has "RECOMMENDED" next to the newer 1.8 and speaks very highly of it. He also speaks very , maybe Very very highly of the 1.4.

One great this I read on Ken Rockwells site was about, newbie amateur photographers who go off buying new lenses in search of "sharpness". One of my big motivators. According to Ken all of the Canon lenses sold with the dslr cameras (canon and nikon in particular) are quite able to produce great sharpness. AND that if my pictures arn't sharp,,,,,I ain't the lenses fault.

Still planning a 50 though. I expect if I stay with this Ill add more than a few other lenses as well.

Maybe I should be looking at the Tamron 18-400, or the Sigma 18-300 Or maybe an L lense covering less range but with better light handling.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

or something like this? Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO Lens for Canon..

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

The zoom lenses you are looking at tend to be Slow in that the largest aperture to let in light is not that large...f/3.5 to f/6.3. F/2.8 is considered to be a Fast zoom, but it comes at a price. Usually over $1500 or more new. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8 IS II are both awesome lenses. They can be used on crop or full frame cameras but are not inexpensive.

You can go with prime lenses for a lower cost. They will be Faster aperture wise and can be used with FF or crop body Canons if you purchase ones with the EF mounts. If you think you might want to go FF one day then it is smart to buy EF mount lenses in my view. The primes can be very sharp and fast focusing but you will have to be all the zooming with your feet. I like the 85mm f/1.8 for about $350-$400 on a FF body. But on a crop sensor it has the field of view of over 135mm lens. Not useful for groups. On a crop body because of the crop reducing the field of view you would likely want to go wide with any EF mount lens... 20 to 50mm range would probably work decently on a crop body...

Best,
Todd Ferguson

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

If you go the 50mm route, then the 1.4 is a good choice for your use. It was my second lens when I started, also with a t3i. I eventually got the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art, which I use constantly for indoor work. The 50 1.4 runs around $320 and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 around $800.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Th Sigma 18-35 does talk to me when I'm looking over what is available at b&h

Thanks

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Bill, right now you have a good assortment of lenses covering your most shot subjects. Why invest more money? Perhaps a lens with an angle of view of a 35mm with full frame could be more useful than the 50mm but that is only my opinion.
Because those lenses have a wide aperture they could be of help when shooting in low light situations.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Todd.
Thanks for your thoughts.
They reinforce what I have been thinking to be the way I should plan a d eventually buy.
I do hope to step up to FF when the day comes to update body so the idea of investing in EF mounts for full has become part of my primary selection process.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Perhaps this is part of your intended point. Because I. shooting a CS wouldn't a 1.4 50 fill the place, for me, that a 85 does for you?

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Yes, it would. Not great for group shots because of the narrow field of view of roughly 85mm lens. The f/1.4 50 is a very nice lens for the money but the f/1.8 Nifty Fiddy is a nice lens for about 1/3 the money. if you intend to shoot at f/1.4 it might be worth it and it should have a better bokeh. To me fast lenses make the most sense if you are going to shoot them wide open a good deal. If you are not, then you are paying for aperture, and in weight with a zoom, that you may not use.

It is also good to understand the relationship between aperture, focal length, crop factor and distance to subject on depth of field or acceptable focus. I recommend you get a good DOF calculator app and play with it. It will be a learning experience for you and you will find that lenses wide open, with a longer focal length can have a small depth of field. Take the Canon 85mm f/1.2 lens. Considered a great portrait lens by some. Yet it has some issues. It is expensive and heavy. It is relatively slow to focus. At normal shooting distances for a head shot it has a razor thin DOF wide open at f/1.2. You can literally have one eye in focus and the other one not very easily. If money is not an issue then it is likely a nice portrait lens to have. But many of the photos I see taken with it on Flicker are shot at f/2.0 or more. Flicker is a neat place to see what others are getting as results with various bodies and lens as you can search for photos taken with the body, lens or a combination.

I usually start at f/5.6 to f/7.1 for my aperture, ISO 160 and 1/160 to 1/200 for an indoor portrait. Not what you need a super fast lens for with these settings as they will usually kill any and all ambient light. I use flash and or monolights to add the light for a desired exposure. My point is that adding light is often less expensive than shooting with fast lenses...if you can use a Speedlite. In some situations you just can't use added light though. Then fast lenses and higher ISO capability can be your best friend. But a Speedlite might be more useful to you than another lens right now.

I would suggest that you take a look at the Robert Harrington videos on YouTube that he does at for B&H. They are some good basic techniques of what can be done with minimal equipment and I think you will learn some things from them.

Lastly, I can recommend the Canon 40mm pancake lens as a very nice low cost lens for under $200. It is not super fast but is sharp side to side and so small and lightweight it is like not even having a lens on your camera. My daughter has one for her T3 and I use it on my 1D bodies at times. It is a fun lens to use IMHO.

Best,
Todd Ferguson

happy sailor Loc: Ontario, Canada

Hi Bill

My daughter has the Canon 1.4 50mm and I have the much less expensive Canon 1.8 50mm, I have used both and both have provided excellent results, I use my 50 when I will be in a lot of low light places where flash is not allowed otherwise I pretty much always have my 4.0 24-105 on my camera. I have a 6d so am full frame and daughter has a crop sensor, she does keep mentioning that she would like something wider and has borrowed by 24-105 once and liked it.

I would like to get an all purpose zoom for vacation like a 28-250 or something like that but haven't found what I want for a full frame camera yet.

My little 50 is the lightest of the 50's and gives amazing results for it's inexpensive (ok cheap) build.

kdogg Loc: Gallipolis Ferry WV

Check out The -Digital-Picture.com. All things Canon and Nikon reviewed there, even some discontinued gear.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Todd
Great help here, thanks for all the thought you put into this. I'll check out the bids you have suggested

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

happy Sailor, Keogh
Thanks to you both for suggestions