stenojj wrote:
When I purchased my first DSLR last March (Rebel T6s), every time I saw an awesome photo posted I "had to have" that lens in my arsenal. Now that I've had my camera for awhile, I find I rarely use some of those lenses. My question is, what would I be safe to hang on to and what should I try and sell? As I live in the country, I take mostly birds, flowers, and my cats. Very rare do I take photos of people although once in a while will take some family photos when they come to visit. I would really like to invest in better glass than a new camera. Thanks in advance for any advice. It's all so new to me.
Canon 18-135 3.5-5.6 IS STM kit lens (which I really like)
Tamron 70-300 VC USD 4.0-5.6
Canon 55-250 4.0-5.6 STM
Canon 24 mm 2.8 STM
Canon 50 mm 1.8 STM
Canon 85 mm 1.8 STM
(I just ordered the 100-400 "L" IS II USM)
When I purchased my first DSLR last March (Rebel T... (
show quote)
OK, my personal take on it. I do mostly birds, bugs/butterflies and flowers. But I also do events like Steam Punk and Civil War Enactments and trains/streetcars/car&truck shows at the museum I belong to.
The 18-135 is a good general purpose lens, roughly the same as my 24-105 in application, I have gone all day at a Steam Punk or Reenactment event with just that lens. So, Keep It
The 100-400 mkII is a great lens for birds etc, it and the 18-135 will make a great 2 lens carry kit for just about anything you may run into.
The 55-250 and 70-300 are now redundant. Unless you do something that doesn't need the 400 reach and want to save size/weight.
The 24 might be good for stars/astro or indoors in fairly dim light, it is good for landscapes, I use a 14mm f/2.8 for those things. Unless the higher quality is important to you the 18-135 covers it, at least in good light. If you get into landscape/astrophotography in a big way I would say replace the 24 with a 10-20 or similar. If you are going to go wide, go wide. I had a Tamron 10-24 but my daughter fell in love with it so I gave it to her for a college graduation gift. When I put my 14mm on my 6D it covers a wider angle of view anyway. (Multiply all you lenses focal lengths by 1.6 to get their angle of view on your T6s. That 24, on your camera, has an AOV of 38.4-wide but not real wide. The 100-400 will have a 160-640 AOV. Your 18-135 is 28.8-216mm AOV)
The 50 1.8, I own one for cases where I am working in dim light, I hardly use it but since 50mm is what I learned on in the 60's I keep it.
The 85 is a very good portrait lens, but that is all, so unless your are really into portraits ??? Too long for wide angle and too short for much telephoto. If you put up humming bird feeders or do butterflies then it would be pretty good when the 100-400 is just too big and heavy. I often use a 100mm macro or 180mm macro when sitting in a chair by the feeders (hummers will get used to you and feed with you pretty darn close), but the 18-135 will cover that-if not with the same Image Quality.
So the only two I don't see a lot of need for are the 55-250 and 70-300.
I do think you might consider a good macro, I would go for at least 100mm, bees, butterflies etc need some room to avoid spooking them, I use a Tamron 180 for them and also hummingbirds at times (on a 7DII).