Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

Re-posted with corrections to title and updates to the topic.

I was hoping to replace my Canon 18-55 & 55-250 lenses with a single lens, when I upgrade to the Canon 7D Mark II in a few weeks.

But in doing some research on the lenses, I'm reading that I might end up by sacrificing sharpness to move to a single lens.

The reason for looking at different lenses, is that I rarely use my 18-55, because it is too short for most of my shooting, and I'm finding that the 55-250 isn't quite long enough at times. Both are kit lenses, and I'm finding that I don't seem to get those really sharp shots with them.

Can anyone provide some insight into any either of the lenses in my title? Or suggest a couple of lenses to cover that range, and/or a little more that would be compatible with the Canon the 7D Mark II as an option that might offer good to excellent clarity and sharp pictures?

I would consider Canon, Sigma or Tamron, if I can afford them. Basically, I need a lens that will respond quickly with auto focus and produce sharp clear shots.

I shoot mostly nature, with the occasional reenactment, maybe an occasional architectural shot, but I definitely want the ability to shoot in some low light situations, or take long exposures.

I don't want another Canon "Kit" lens, because of their limitations on possibly adding a tele-converter or an extension tube to a kit lens, due to how their mounts are designed. And, yes, I've been told that I can't really do that, I just want that possible option.

I would consider pro, or semi-pro lenses if I could find them at a reasonable price.

Yes, I would consider a used lens, if it was purchased from a reputable dealer.

I will not be ready to pull the trigger on the lens purchase(s) for at least a month or more, so I will keep an eye on specials being offered. Cash doesn't bounce, so, I earn it before I spend it.

I will be looking to trade in my Rebel T5 when I purchase the 7D Mark II, because the burst speed can't keep up with what I need. It has been a great entry level camera, but for me it's just time to upgrade, and end my frustration with the slow burst speed in Raw, or Raw and JPEG.

katbandit Loc: new york city

i have the tamron 16-300mm and found it to be one of the best all around lenses i own..in fact i was impressed with it considering i use mostly prime lenses and better zooms for my work related photos..however this is my favorite go to lens if I'm going out and about for the day to shoot some fun photos ..the images are quite sharp ..

shutterbob Loc: Tucson

I have owned the Tamron 16-300, Sigma 18-300, and currently the Sigma 18-250. The Sigma 18-250 that I am currently using is my favorite of the three. All three focus reasonably quick as long as there is decent light. The auto focus slows down as the light dims or if you are using the longer end of the focal range on all three of them. None of them will be as sharp edge to edge as a good prime or something like a 24-70 f2.8 lens, but the versatility is often worth the trade off. In dusty conditions, not having to change lenses is a big plus. All three are much better than any of the all in one lenses from a few years ago. I like my current Sigma because it is so small and light. It stays on my camera most of the time but I do own a couple of good primes and f2.8 lenses for when conditions call for them. Depending on what you shoot, you may find this to be the best way to go lens wise. As long as you understand that these lenses have limitations, I think you will enjoy their great versatility.

Gifted One Loc: S. E. Idaho

I found the best for me was the Canon EFs 15-85mm and the EFs 10-22mm. I have used on 60D and 7D. My copies are so sharp - - -! I do have a natural bias against lon zoom range.

J. R.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

You will find that super zooms in general have much poorer IQ than shorter zooms and primes. If pin sharp images are important to you, look elsewhere. The Tamron is a very nice lens in this category which goes both very wide and very long, However, the IQ will not be any better than your kit lenses and will not be particularly sharp at 300mm. Super zooms also tend to be soft along the image edge, and stopping down usually doesn't improve sharpness very much.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

I have e the Sigma 18-300. I like it.

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

Unfortunately, I need a lens that is much longer than the two you have recommended.

Last night, I tried to shoot a bird in a tree almost directly above where I was standing. My 55-250 simply didn't have the reach to get the bird close enough to be able to identify it.

When I viewed the shots, although I could clearly make out the feather definition in my view finder, all of the shots were blurry. I shot at 1/500, and let the ISO and f-stop default. The bird was a bright orange in the late afternoon sun, but it wasn't yet the golden hour, the trees weren't glowing.

It turns out that year bird appeared much larger than it actually was, because it had fluffed out it's feathers against the wind. It was singing up a storm, and was being answered by another bird in the distance. The call was familiar, but with the bright orange coloring, I couldn't place it.

Well, when I enlarged the shot in my windows editor, it had a distinctive red beak, and some black around the eyes. My strange looking bird was a male cardinal.

I only use Windows editor for the first pass on my shots, to quickly scroll the shots larger, looking for clarity, and move the clear ones into a "Selected" folder for that photo shoot. Then, I use Photo Shop to actually do my editing.

But the Cardinal shots further illustrated my need for a longer range lens, and I know that I should have hauled out my tripod, but I was shooting in a fairly busy parking lot, and a tripod would have placed me in the middle of the traffic pattern for too long.

I should have boosted my shutter speed up even more, but hindsight is always 20/20. I will try again in a few days, because it is likely that the pair is nesting in the trees behind the bookstore.

MTG44 Loc: Corryton, Tennessee

I have had both those lens and found the Sigma was sharper and worked a little more smoothly. Also there is no lens creep with the Sigma. It is on my 7D11 90% of the time and is a great travel/walk around lens.

JMB9250 Loc: Upminster, Essex, UK

I shoot with a D7000 and use the Tamron 16-300 a lot. I have found it to be surprisingly sharp for the price. It is light, compact and reasonably robust too. It's a good compromise if you really don't want to lug a lot of heavy lenses around

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

Thanks for the heads up about the lens creep with the Tamron.

But, now, I'm actually thinking about splitting the range, and possibly getting a a 18-135, and a lens that will cover a longer range, either up to 400 or 500. If you look at my just posted comnent, my 55-250 just isn't long enough, so I'm thinking that 300 will still be too short.

I need to do my homework, because I also need lenses that have quick response times, so that also jacks up my price range.

Decisions, decisions, decisions!

I guess I'll be keeping my existing lenses for the short term, while I gather more cash, and do some more detailed research into my options.

Indi Loc: L. I., NY, Palm Beach Cty when it's cold.

I have the Sigma 18-300mm (C) (Contemporary). I like this lens a lot. It is on my camera 95% of the time.
The Contemporary (C) allows you to use Sigma's USB Dock and make adjustments to the focal point of the lens and also allows you to upgrade the firmware.
That being said, my favorite lens is my Sigma 17-70mm (C). I think it's a bit sharper than the 18-300mm, and I use it whenever possible. Great for car shows and similar situations.

Jim Ermer

My Tamron 16-300mm has a lens lock. I have experienced no lens creep.

MikeFromMT Loc: So Cal & MT

I have the Tamron 16-300 on two 7D's all the time except if I need wider or longer. If traveling by car I can take as much as I want but if by plane I only take the Tamron. Does what I want it too.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The perfect choice for birding is the $2100 Canon 100-400mm II which is often the lens of choice for birders using the Canon 7D2. The IQ is superb but its not the do it all lens you want. If performance is paramount there is no superzoom that will fill the bill. If the 55-250 was too short to capture the bird you wanted , its likely 300mm of the 16-300mm won't be long enough either, and it sure won't be pin sharp.