What’s Your Preference?

chelsealennox · #1 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 10:31 PM

I have only just purchased my Rebel T1I in October or something like that, and only just now am I starting to get the hang of manual settings (yay me! :P). I currently have the lens that came with my camera, an 18-55mm, and my boyfriend bought me a 50mm lens for Christmas. I am looking to buy a lens that I will use pretty often, possibly one that zooms nicely or something because at the moment my 50mm doesn't zoom at all and my 18-55mm doesn't zoom in very far. I am backpacking Europe starting this summer for 6 months, so keep in mind I can't be carrying around something MASSIVE with me. Thanks for all the help!

inkista · #2 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 10:50 PM

Small, light, and inexpensive, I'd say the $250 EF-S 55-250 IS might be what you're looking for to round out the collection.

If you've got more to spend, and want to lighten the load even more, than the $450 EF-S 18-135 IS or $600 EF-S 18-200 IS superzooms might be worth looking into. You'll be sacrificing some image quality for the convenience, though.

If you have a lot of money ($750) to spend and want really good image quality, then the EF-S 15-85 IS USM might be more what you're looking for.

dlambert · #3 (**permalink**) 02-04-2011, 10:57 PM

All zoom lenses are compromises, to some degree. For any focal length you can cover with a zoom, there's a pretty good chance someone's got a prime lens that's better (+/- a few mm of zoom). Nevertheless, we buy zooms because we don't want to buy and carry two dozen lenses, and because we can shoot a range of subjects without changing lenses. You're trading cost and weight for quality, in effect.

Picking a lens for backpacking is a *really* big compromise, because lenses with really big zoom factors tend to be mediocre at any given focal length. One of the leading contenders in this space is Tamron's 18-270, which has a fantastic range and a size suitable for backpacking. If you go and read reviews on this lens, though, you'll see a lot of concerns about quality. If you can give up a little range, Canon's 18-200 might be a step up in quality.

If you can handle carrying two lenses, you've probably got some better options, because there are some decent 70-n lenses available:

Canon's 70-300 USM has been pretty well-received. It's a big step up from the previous 75-300 lens.
Tamron has a new 70-300 VC with ring-type focus motor that I've heard good things about.
For a little more money, you can start looking at something like a 70-200 f/4 L or f/2.8 L, which are very well-liked, but not inexpensive.

I've got the 55-250 that inkista mentioned. It's a good lens, but I think I'd be pretty tempted to move right up to the Tamron 70-300 if I were doing it all over again. The good news, though, is that lenses tend to have a pretty good resale value, so the cost of changing your mind is fairly small (compared to some hobbies, anyway - try getting any money for a pair of used hiking boots!).

dslr_shooter · #4 (**permalink**) 02-06-2011, 03:29 AM

I have to agree with the other posts. The Canon 18-200mm is probably your best bet in terms of traveling light. The 55-250mm pairs very nice with your 18-5mm, but the build quality in both of these lenses don't compare to the 18-200mm. I think you'll find that the image quality of the 18-200mm is just as good as the 18-55mm and 55-250mm.

Another issue to consider is changing lenses in the field. Backpacking with a single lens means no changing of lenses which is definitely a plus in my book. I spent a mere 2 weeks in London/Paris last year and I loved that fact that I only had one lens with me. Pull the camera out of the bag and it's ready to fire!