I would not disagree with you but why would you sell such a great lens in the first place if you are not changing system or moving to FF?
And I do not have in mind any of that.
I am not a pro and I don't make a living out of photography either to invest heavily on cameras and lenses.
I am just trying to do my hobby in a cost effective way.

When I got the 18-55 STM it was a huge upgrade with respect to the 18-55 DC III not only because of the IS or the STM focusing motor. It is much sharper as well and for a little less than 120 euros
there was nothing to think about. But if the mount of the DC was not damaged I would stick with it.
I would not mind staying with the 18-55 STM but it is low light performance that is missing and shallow depth of field when light is enough.

It does not make much sense to me getting a 18-135mm lens.
I would still need the 55-250 for the rest of the tele range.
And it still is not a great low light performer.

Hi, my 600D has only peripheral illumination correction but I can do it in LR.
Even if I would upgrade the body at some point the Canon lens would still be a very expensive lens.

I guess you are right but the Canon 17-55 F2.8 new costs almost three times more than the Sigma.
Even used is sold for double the price of the Sigma.
It seems like it has a better build quality but the image quality is comparable if I am going to trust the reviews I have watched and read.

On the other hand the 24mm pancake from Canon lacks IS so I will still miss the ability to take a sharp photo in low light without raising the ISO too much.

After all this said would anyone recommend the Sigma 17-50 F2.8 or not?

Hi, I like to shoot many different things. In general I will shoot anything I find interesting as long as I have the camera with me and with the wide angle and the tele lenses I am able to do that.

I am really pleased with the 35mm , the 10-18 and the 55-250.
I also like the 50mm but in low light I miss the IS in this one and if I am about to raise the ISO to 800 and above I get noise that makes the picture look as if it is not focused even though it is.
I am not pleased with this one for portraits in low light because of the noise.

It is not the features that I miss.
What I want is better low light performance.
The 35mm with IS is great but it is neither short or long.

Haha, you might be right about the GAS since I feel now and then my left hand itching (it's the left pocket were I keep my wallet).

But lets say that I feel that irresistible urge to spend some money.

The largest amount that I paid for a lens was for the 35mm macro but I love it and it is the one I use the most both for macros and as a general purpose lens (even at work to take some very close pictures of defective electronic assemblies when I can't use the digital microscope) and I really do not consider spending more than that for a lens in general.
Next in use come the 10-18 and the 55-250.
I like very much the shallow depth I can get with the 50mm but the lack of IS is constraining in low light when I am handholding the camera.
I would say that the 18-55 is the lens I use the least but it is not the focal range that puts me off...
I do not raise the ISO too much (I usually do not go above 800) because I do not like the noise I get and I hate it when I get a blurred image just because the shutter speed is not fast enough...
I guess I could improve a little bit my technique but the 1/focal length for shutter speed is a hard limit I can't beat when there is no IS and no tripod.

I forgot to mention that my camera is a Canon 600D (T3i).

Hi everybody,

It is quite some time that I am considering getting a new lens.
I consider IS as a nice to have feature especially indoors.
I do not shoot video.
Not considering to go FF any time soon.
There is no option to test the lens (at least the Sigma).

The lenses that I have right now are the
Canon 10-18mm IS STM
Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM
Canon 55-250mm IS STM
Canon 35mm F2.8 IS STM macro
Canon 50mm F1.8 STM

The last two primes fall within the range of the 18-55.
So I am thinking to either replace the standard zoom 18-55 kit lens with a faster one or add another prime within its range.

These are the options I have in mind:

1. replace my kit lens (Canon EF-S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM) with the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM.
2. keep the kit lens that I already have and get the Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 STM


Option 1:

The Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 OS price is getting lower and can be bought from amazon for less than 300 euros new including shipping right now
but I don't think that the stock will last for long (probably a replacement from Sigma is on the way???).

I had a look in DXOmark and compared the Canon kit lens that I have with the Canon F2.8, Tamron F2.8 and Sigma F2.8.
The constant F2.8 lenses do not look quite that sharp with the aperture wide open and there is not a huge difference in sharpness in equal apertures with the STM kit lens.
At least this is how I interpret the field map diagrams when I compare between these lenses.

The canon F2.8 17-55 is quite expensive and I do not intend to make such a large investment at this point.
The equivalent Tamron is more expensive than the Sigma and seems softer so I do not consider it as an option.

To me it seems that the "only" benefit would be the wider aperture of the Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS over the Canon 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS STM
but in terms of sharpness I will probably not notice any upgrade. The Sigma offers two thirds of a stop wider aperture at the wide end and
2 stops wider aperture at the long end compared to the kit lens which might be good for stopping the action using higher shutter speeds
but the fact is that I do not usually shoot moving subjects or shooting indoors with lower ISO setting.
On the other hand sharpness in the centre looks OK and usually this is all that is needed since everything in the background won't be needed to be in focus
(actually out of focus background matters more) so soft corners would matter only if I would take a picture of a flat surface which is perpendicular to the lens.
So sharpness from corner to corner isn't that important after all.
Correct me if I am wrong.

Option 2:

The alternative option would be the Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 STM pancake lens which seems to be sharper than all three zoom lenses at F2.8 at 24mm or near it.
It costs half the money than the Sigma BUT it doesn't have IS so I will not be able to use it indoors without raising the ISO too high.

In this case I can have three prime lenses:
1. Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 STM
2. Canon EF-S 35mm F2.8 IS STM macro
3. Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM
which are sharper than all the other zoom lenses at the equivalent focal lengths and the 35mm could serve me well indoors since it has IS
although it is not that wide.

The third option would be to just get the Sigma 17-50 F2.8 now that the price is attractive and maybe get the Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 STM for Christmas.

So what is your opinion?
Could the Sigma replace without noticeable degradation of image quality the prime lenses when I do not want to carry many lenses with me?
The 17mm is 30% wider with respect to 24mm so in confined spaces it does make some sense to have a wide aperture along with a wider angle.
Would you consider it a bargain at 300 euros (350$)?
Does anyone have compared the Canon STM kit lens and the Sigma lens?

Hello everyone, I am glad to find you all here.

I am considering taking a class in photography this year.

I am aware that there are two "schools" here where I live that have photography classes
but this is not something standard and it depends on the interest of participation each year.

Hope that at least one of those art labs will have a class this year.

Hi Robyn,
Nice to find you all here in the forum.
As for the length of the post I am sorry but I never said that it would be a short one! :)

Well, short of.

As a kid in the 80s in my family I only remember a polaroid instant camera which must have failed at some point relatively early and a simple Kodak point and shoot.
The polaroid was exciting as I could see the developed photograph in just a few minutes after it was taken. The colors were much different than what I was used to at that time.
The Kodak on the other hand was just boring. It was a cheap black plastic box with just a couple of buttons other than the shutter release button and I don't remember shooting more that 3 or 4 films per year.
This was the family camera and remained as such until early 00s when it stopped working.

The first time that I had the chance to hold a manual film camera was in the early 90s.
I still remember visiting my grandparents in the village where my father grew up. My father's youngest brother had a Russian Kiev rangefinder.
I remember at that time that many people from the former Soviet Union would sell surplus or used equipment in the local flea markets everywhere and this is what I remember telling me when I asked him were he found that camera
with the strange Cyrillic characters.

Well, this was magnificent!!!
Metal body with a real lens and machined dials that I had no idea of their purpose but it looked nothing like the plastic and uninteresting Kodak (I know it would be the same for every other
camera at this category so sorry for that Kodak :) ).
Even the twist locks on the bottom of the camera to open the back and replace the film roll were a nicely engineered piece of work.

This was the first time I realized that you can focus on your subject and isolate it from the background. I was about ten years old.
I still remember focusing and shooting around even with no film inside that camera.
For that I am grateful to my uncle, letting me play with a piece of equipment bought with hard earned money at that time.
I must admit that since I was a kid I was very cautious with all shorts of equipment and I could tell if something was meant to be handled with care.
I suspect that this is the reason why he would let me use the camera.

The other thing was the 4x6 prints. Locally we had two (or three) options Kodak and Agfa (not sure about fujifilm).
My father would go to Kodak because the owner of the shop lived right across the street.
I later realized that printed photos on Agfa were much more pleasing (more saturated colors) the surface finishing was not exactly matte, it was glossy but at the same time grainy (it was much harder to leave a fingerprint on it) and the thin white frame in the Agfa prints was looking really nice.
Well I don't know if the specific Kodak printer was set correctly or not but the impression I was left with was that Agfa prints were much more lively and the image would pop out of the paper.

These experiences must have planted a seed of curiosity about photography somewhere at the very back of my mind.
Then I grew up and I almost forgot about all this.
Maybe because I knew that the result would not be what I would like it to be and the use of that specific family low end camera was soooo uninviting.

It was around 2008 when I got my first digital point and shoot camera, a Canon A460. Nothing special to write about.
At some point I had installed a 3rd party firmware that would add a lot of cool features in that little camera.

And then ten years after here I am with a proper camera writing in this forum my story introducing myself.
It is not the best camera, I'd say it is pretty much outdated and the lenses are not the best money can buy
but for me and my hobby it is more than adequate.

All this might sound silly to many of you, but I grew up in an environment that apart from my uncle in the village had no interest in photography except
taking family snapshots once in a while. Later when I was in university just a couple of friends owned a DSLR but it was out of my budget at that time.

This is how I got my DSLR by pure luck.
A friend of mine got a Canon 600D (T3i) as a gift for being a bridesmaid.
She opened it, took a couple of shots and then put it back in the box and left it there for years sitting on a bookself.
The bride - her old friend from school - should have known better that this wasn't the right kind of gift for her :).
One day more than a year ago she asked me how much she could sell it since she knew she would never going to use it.
I told her that I was interested in buying it. She insisted on giving it to me for free but this did not feel right. After all she wanted to sell it, not give it away.
I just asked if I could borrow it for a couple of days to test it and understand if this was something that I would enjoy or not.
Without a second thought I bought it from her the very next day.

The camera came with the most basic kit lens, the 18-55 DC III without IS and this was the only lens I was using for almost a year.
Last Easter I had the camera with me in a traditional feast that a friend had me invited at.
Someone must have stepped on the bag that I had the camera in because after a couple of days when I tried to remove the lens its mount was broken- I can't find any other way this couldhave happened.

Admittedly one of the good things when a lens has a plastic mount apart from lower weight is that any stress applied will damage the plastic mount, not the camera body.

I repaired it with some super glue but my first thought was that it would eventually fail the most inappropriate moment when I would really need it.
So I started looking online for reviews to find a replacement lens.

Till that time I just had a rough idea about how much a lens could cost but I had already found out that the blurred background would call for a wider aperture and the reach of the
18-55 lens was not enough for me on both ends of wide and tele.

First off I bought the 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS STM to replace the broken lens and the 50mm STM to get the desired effect of out of focus background.
I really liked the new lenses and in a short while I decided spending some money to get wider angles and longer reach so I acquired the 10-18mm IS STM
along with the 55-250 IS STM.
Now my camera backpack would not be spacious enough for those lenses!!!
Problems, problems, problems which were all solved when i got a nice and spacious backpack for my new toys.
Last but not least the 35mm STM macro with the built in light ring was added to the kit.

You really can't go wrong with these lenses when you are on a tight budget especially if you can get any of them in a white box (the 18-55 and the 55-250 in my case).
They are well built with the 18-55 being the only exception, they do not cost much (got them all new for 1K), they are reasonably sharp and they meet my expectations for what they cost.

Someone could say that I've gone through the GAS lighty but this came after spending quite some time with the kit lens finding out what are its limitations
and what I need and the 18-55 cannot offer.

All except the 50mm have IS which is a desired feature for me since I prefer to hand hold and avoid using a tripod or high ISO settings.
I also do not like to use the built in flash, I don't like the way it flattens the image and it looks harsh unless it is done on purpose to give that certain look or it is an absolute necessity.
With the 10-18 I am able to take usable pictures with shutter speeds of one whole second or even two if I am lucky when I am in the 10mm focal length
and I like it a lot for the wide viewing angle it offers which comes pretty handy in many situations from cityscapes to countryside.
This along with the 55-250 and the macro are the most used lenses.

I know I have a lot to learn and I need a lot of practice but it is not the technical stuff that worries me.
Most of all I understand that I lack this insight that a photographer has and gives the ability to transform an uninteresting scene to an eye pleasing composition,
the ability to choose the very right spot, the perfect angle, playing with the light and the shadow, the color and the shapes and the perspective.
Sometimes I am just lucky and get it almost right but most of the times It is just a snapshot with wider angle or out of focus background.
I am aware that it is not the gear...
And all this ends with a sigh...

Hi Chris,

If your special one never showed any interest in photography then consider buying her something else instead of a camera.

But if she has some interest in that hobby then go for it.

You mentioned that you have lots of Canon glass and some Pentax as well.
As a novice user I found out really early the limitations of low light performance (narrow aperture) and lack of IS in my kit lens and this was the only one I had for almost a year
until I decided to buy some new lenses.
The articulated screen and IBIS of Pentax sound like a really cool feature and would help to take sharp images from start.
On the other hand Canon and Nikon do not have IBIS but Canon has a fully articulated touchscreen.

The built in guide is not a must have imho since you can spend time with her to show and explain the basics.

Personally if I had to choose right now I would go for a Canon T6i/s, T7i or 77D camera .
I am not a fanboy, it just happened almost accidentally to be Canon T3i (600D) the first DSLR camera that I got (like new with just 2 clicks) and it was very easy to use from start.

When I decided to get more lenses after a year with the 18-55 kit lens it was a pleasant surprise that I could find easily very affordable and decent quality lenses
to cover a broad focal range from 10 to 250mm focal length with three of the newest STM lenses (10-18, 18-55, 55-250)...

These are not pricey and all have great IS and virtually noise free focusing.

The STM 50mm 1.8 is also a very nice and cheap lens as well (great for portraits) but it is not as quiet and has no IS.

Then there are also 3 options for Canon macro lenses.

Also every EF and EF-S mount lens (Canon or third party) will be fully operational with it.

All I am trying to say is that you can build an affordable system that can cover any amateur use (from macro to the verge of super tele)
because in the end the most important part is not the body (which more or less has similar functionality regardless of the manufacturer)
but the plethora of lenses to choose from.

And if it feels right for an upgrade after a couple of years there are options for better crop bodies as well.

Welcome beesue!

I am new in the DSLR world as well. I got a "used" T3i with a shutter count of 2 from a friend at a really good price almost a year ago.
The camera was just sitting in its box for years waiting for some action :)
It was the last six months that I started buying some lenses and replaced the original kit lens (it was the 18-55 DC III with no IS...) with the newer 18-55 IS STM.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn your gear.
Read the manual and find out what your camera is capable of.
If you do not understand something I am sure you will find a good explanation on youtube.

Practice and find out how to handhold the camera as steady as possible so that you minimise shake no matter what mode you are using.
It will help taking sharper pictures whatsoever.

If your lens has image stabilisation turn it on as long as you handhold the camera.

Manual focus when using the viewfinder is a little bit tricky so you better use autofocus.
You can practice with manual focus if your subject is stationary. When one of the 9 focus points lights red in the viewfinder that means that this point is focused.
It might help when in autofocus mode if you set only the centre focus point as active and learn how to lock focus and recompose (this doesn't work very well if your subject is close to you because geometry and distance change when you recompose and this might result in out of focus takes)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read about the focal length and the aperture (this will explain what you'll need for long distance pictures or portraits)
Read online about the exposure triangle and how aperture, shutter speed and ISO are related.
Understand what a stop is.
Have a look at the crop factor and its meaning.
Read about some basic rules like sunny 16 if you are in full manual mode or how the focal length and the shutter speed are connected to get sharper pictures (shutter speed needs to be greater than the reciprocal of the effective focal length in order to minimise shake)

Start with the more automated modes when you don't want to miss a shot but...

I would suggest that you start playing right away with the aperture or shutter priority or even fully manual modes, practice a lot and start getting used to it.

Do not get frustrated (even though you will some times :) ), experiment and start studying the technicalities using free online resources.
It is more likely that the first shots will be a disappointment being worse than snapshots from a cellphone but this will change if you practice a little bit.
When you are taking a shot that is important and you are in a mode that permits some short of manual adjustment take a look at the photo you just took and maginfy it in
the LCD as much as you can (x10) so that you are sure that there is no motion blur and your subject is in focus.

I got a DSLR because I just wanted to have more control over the camera apart from getting better image quality photos in comparison with a phone or a compact.
Other than that it is not the most practical thing to carry around a bulky camera with a heavy backpack filled with lenses, extra batteries, filters, tripods and God only knows what else.

I did not expect to take better photos (as a more pleasant visual result) just because I started using a DSLR
even though I can see wonderful pictures taken even with cellphones.
But I can see that through practice I am able to take better and better pictures with respect to what I was capable of before getting a DSLR apart from the extra capabilities
that a kit of multiple lenses offer like having a longer reach or wider angle or wide aperture for that pleasing blurring effect on the background or pretty close macros.
In reality it is not the camera that made the difference. It is practice which most of the times is pure fun. It just takes time and patience to improve.
The technical stuff are the easiest to learn. The difficult for me is getting more artistic results finding a nicely framed interesting subject.
I am thinking about taking a class this October in order to improve and get better shots.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are in a tight budget regarding the lenses for portrait or long reach consider my propositions below.

A good choice without breaking the bank is the Canon EF 50mm F1.8 which is very nice for portraits and would cost around 120$ new.
The only drawback is that it does not have IS so you must take account of this when shooting in low light.

For long distance you will need a telephoto lens which could be suitable for portraits as well if the light permits (usually the aperture is dark on the cheaper ones).
A very nice choice would be the Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS STM but I do not know if you need more reach than that.
If you buy it in bulk packaging new it could be found for less than 150$ (bulk package/white box is usually new lenses that were included as a kit lens with a camera).
This might or might not come with warranty.

I own both of those lenses and I am very pleased with them. Image quality is good, built quality is more than acceptable and they are really worth every penny they cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since you are new to DSLR it would be better to experiment and take your time with any choices you might want to make.
Go out and take pictures with what you got right now.
Clarify your needs, make a list and find out what are the tools you are missing.
Define your budget.
Watch and read as many reviews as possible in order to come to a final conclusion.
Youtube will be your best friend in your quest.

Hope I helped more than confusing you.

Go for the 10-18mm Canon. It is a very nice lens and it is fun to use. It is all plastic but it is of much better built quality than the kit 18-55 lens (very little wobble or play when it is extended), it is very light and it has IS which is very useful if you consider the narrow aperture (F 4.5-5.6 maximum from 10 to 18 respectively) that makes it difficult to avoid shake indoors even with the lights on. Outdoors even when it is overcast there is not a big issue.

I don't think so.
Canon lets you make the conversion.
A 18-55 kit lenses for cropped sensor would be the equivalent of the focal range multiplied by 1.6 in FF (around 29-88mm) regarding field of view.