New Rebel XT user looking for lens recommendations

[rzoeller]

I just received my Canon Rebel XT as a gift which included the 18-55mm kit lens. I've read a lot of very mediocre/bad reviews of that lens and am trying to determine what lenses would make sense to acquire over time (and in what order). Unfortunately, trying to sort through the maze of Canon/Sigma/Tamron/etc. lenses and quality of lenses is extremely tough for an amateur like myself.

I envision taking a lot outdoor sports pictures of my kids (baseball, skiing, etc.), some wildlife shots, and a fair amount of inside family pictures and portraits - most or all with a flash. As a result, I originally considered a Tamron 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 that seemed to cover most of my needs (and a comparable Sigma). But the more I read, the more it seems that I might not be happy with the quality of a lens like this for what I'm interested in and I'd end up buying overlapping lenses anyway. I really don't want to have a different lens for every situation though, so keeping it to 2 lenses would be ideal if I could get good quality.

So there are some of the lenses that seem to make some sense to me given my total price target (< $1000 absolute max total - would prefer less) and the information I have been able to gather. I've either read way too much or way too little. Or maybe I'm just overanalyzing the heck out of it.

* Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 or Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 or Canon 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM - certainly the Canon is the cheapest alternative in the first group.

* Canon 70-200mm f/4 L - this just seems to be a great lens at a great price, but I'm open to others for less $ if they are decent.

* Canon 50mm F/1.8 (ok, for $80 I might go 3 lenses, and this apparently the discount lens to have for non-flash photo ops)

Are there any obvious choices I am missing in any of these categories? I know I am leaving out the lower range if I get the 28-105, but I'm not sure I'd use it much. Older, high quality lenses would be fine - as long as I take the smaller frame into account and accept that I'm leaving out the lower range. I also still have the 18-55mm kit lens, but I doubt I would do anything with it at this point. Yet another option would be to really buy an 18-200 type all-purpose lens, use it for a year or two and then resell it as I start to upgrade. There are obvious drawbacks to that as well.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Randal

[Broncosaurus]

For Little League Baseball, any of the xx-200mm zoom will do. And you can't go wrong with Canons L series. For high school level ball & up I think you would be happier with a xx-300mm. Canon's non-L 70-300 IS is about the same price as thier 70-200 f/4 L. For a non-L lens, it is pretty nice quality. I think there's a long back order on this lens though due to a recently corrected product recall.
As far as the other brands (Tamron, Sigma, etc..) alot of the negative you will read needs to be taken with a grain of salt. These guys do make some cheap lenses, but they also make some professional quality ones as well. There's quite a few Canon owners who consider it sacrelege to use anything but Canon glass.

[dmm96452]

As you can see in my signature I have three of the lenses on your list and love all three of them.

The 70-200 f/4L is a great lens and will serve you well at the little league games. With crop it is a 112-320 lens.

The 50mm f/1.8 is also a great deal for the money. Very fast and can keep you from needing the flash for a while longer. But with the 1.6 crop factor it becomes 80mm and can be difficult to use in a smaller room.

That is where the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 comes in. At 2.8 it is still fast enough to keep you from having to go to flash too early in the party and at 28mm (effectively about 45mm) it should be wide enough to fet the shot.

I have created links to each lens review here on PR. They are all very well thought of by everyone that uses them.

Hope this helps.

[cr_mmurillo]

I am new to Photography. I got my Rebel XT too just a month ago. I bought a lens at Ritz camera (Tamron AF18-200MM F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II Lens) as a first upgrade. Ritz gives you thirty days to try out stuff. I don't really know why I returned that lens, but it worked very well. I guess I returned it so see what else is out there. Here is the link to the lens bellow.

http://www.photographyreview.com/sf-...eviewscrx.aspx

My next lens is being shipped tomorrow. It's a Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. I'll let you know how that compares to the Tamron. My think is that I like to try out different things and make a decision. It's a lot of work, but I like to find out for my self what works for me.

Thanks,
Matt

[cr_mmurillo]

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM two day after owning, I've been shooting, and I think I will go with the Canon lens instead of the Tamron I mentioned earlier.

There were a lot of people that were saying this lens is soft. Here are some sample pictures of the I took. I am satisfied with the results

[pammylauj]

Great pictures!

[mimirogers]

Hi, personaly I would go for the Canon 70-200mm. I have one and it never fails for sporty shots or portraits, its one hell of a lens and for a resonable price.

[BuddyB]

Those people that said the lens was soft were right:idea: :idea:

[Photo-John]

Those people that said the lens was soft were right:idea: :idea:

Can you be more specific, Buddy? Did you have a bad experience with the 28-135mm IS or are you going by the photos Matt posted?