Reverse mount Canon EOS DSLR to the EF-S 55-250mm using Movo AF (Auto Focus) Reverse Mount Macro Lens Converter for Canon EOS DSLR and you will have the best and most versatile "MACRO ZOOM LENS". YOU can even mount a Canon macro ring flash to this rig.
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is my go-to lens on my Canon 80D! Acceptably sharp at f/2.8, very sharp when stopped down to f/4-5.6, has OIS (though not as good as Canon's), very usable eqv focal length of 27-80mm and reasonable weight. Great lens to travel around with. Only problem is the autofocus doesn't support in-body settings. In HK it can be had for around USD $250.
I agree. I use it on my C200 and it's brilliant. I sold my 70-200 L IS and keep the 55-250 because it's so much more manageable. Just make sure it's the STM version.
Great lens, but you gotta look for the is stm version, which is best optically and with fast internal focus, got mine for like 80€ shipped in mint condition, really great value, even for portrait work
Whenever I watch a DPReview TV video, I just feel want go out there taking photos. Thanks guys to keep high people's interest in photography. I think APS-C Refelx cameras are still good photographic tools, and this kind of buying guides are always welcome. As for Pentax, being the only brand exclusively committed to reflex camerasn (and being myself a Pentaxian), I think it deserve a lenses buying guide like this. Greetings from Japan
What do you guys use it for mostly? A friend has an F mount version that he's looking to get rid of and I wanted to see if it fit somewhere in my lineup... I have mostly a couple of primes and the Canon 55-250 EFS lens.
Akshay Anand I use it for landscapes, buildings, street and portraits. It’s autofocus is slow and noisy, so video and moving subjects it’s not really good for.
Akshay Anand also if you have a STM 18-55 kit Lens I probably wouldn’t spend the money unless you are getting it cheap because the kit lens is almost as good
Eli Kotkes I think the main difference is the faster aperture to be honest, I use my sigma over my kit lens almost every time. It is a fair bit heavier and bigger in comparison though but I only use it on a tripod. Like I said b4 if you already own a stm 18-55 kit lens it may not be worth the upgrade unless you want that faster aperture.
I would add the Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM + add a 58 2.2X Tele converter filter lens and get 121-550mm telephoto for just about $200 (used) Reverse mount the Canon EOS DSLR to the EF-S 55-250mm using Movo AF (Auto Focus) Reverse Mount Macro Lens Converter for Canon EOS DSLR and you will have the best and most versatile "MACRO ZOOM LENS". YOU can even mount a Canon macro ring flash to this rig.
Yes, i used the yongnuo 100mm but it had issues focusing, and found mint Canon 85/1.8 for 190€, great value and it transitions well to ff camera as well 🤔
@@christopherpackart it is pretty sharp, even on crop sensor, just the purple fringing is somewhat problem 🤔 for me 35/2 is usm is sharpest from my primes, even wide open
@@EpicDubstepManiac i had also focusing issues with the 100mm youngnuo too and not compatible with m50 (makes wierd things, camera locks up, fails to focus)
I had problem where it would not focus near infinity, indoor was ok, worked with nd filter for whatever reason but when i wanted to shoot something 20+ meters away i could not, if you can find 85mm under 200€ sell that yongnuo while you can, it will be worthless with mirrorless cameras
3 out of 4 of my lenses, not bad at all. Especially the sigma 17-70 is very versatile, use it a lot. Better in low light and better range than a kit lens - nice entry macro capabilities - sharpness and bokeh at 70mm is quiet nice so even portraits are greatly possible. Thank you for another great video
81 Springbrook it’s probably the only APSC lens work taking between systems. On a camera like the EOS R and C200, Blackmagic etc it works well with cropped 4K
@@TheMindedOnes I can't remember now as it was 18months ago and I chopped in some lenses to offset the cost. I got it from mpb and it was a mint condition one. I did buy the docking hub on amazon as it was a reasonable price - cheaper than the Tamron docking station. I've run it a couple of times on the Sigma hub but only the first time was there an update. I've heard people like Tony Nortrup slag off the lens for focusing but on by Canon 8OD the AF works a treat - although I'm a stills guy not a video guy. On my APSC it's equivalent to an f2.8 Full Frame so have got some good blue hour shots and even got a half decent Milky Way image when stacking several shots. It's probably the lens I use most but it's not light so you might not take it on a long hike.
I switched from canon to Fuji a year or so ago and while I do have some Fuji glass, I still use my 10-18, 24, and 50 adapted to Fuji with a Fringer Pro because they're superb for the money. To get the equivalent in Fuji is beyond my wallet capabilities so those lenses aren't just great for canon apsc 😁
An honorable mention could've been the Canon EF-S 15-85mm. You can get it used in Europe for about €250, it has the best image quality of all EF-S zooms, it is solidly build, has extremely effective image stabilisation and the focal length is a dream for travel.
With all of the upgraded lenses I have, I still shoot with the 50 1.8 STM! It's in my bag next to my 85 1.8 and either a 35 1.4 or 24 1.4. It's such a great lens, ESPECIALLY when you add the price. I'll say that the 85 1.8 is also one of my favorites. It's so old now, that I got it for $240 and it's been one of my favorite lenses I have ever bought.
@@jordymaas565 both. I currently have a Canon 6D, a Sony audio, and a Fuji X100V. The Canon gets the least love now but I take it when I'd be afraid of losing or damaging the others (or nightscapes)
One of the reasons why I picked a Canon DSLR over a Sony mirrorless 6 years ago. So many affordable, good quality, native lenses. All 4 of my lenses are entry-level Canon lenses.
The EF 70-300 II IS is a great lens, and on an AS-C body it has the effective Focal length of 110 to 480mm. That's a lot of reach. With modern DIGIC 8 handling higher ISO's, this lens is affordable and performs quite well for Sports and wildlife. My APS-C kit includes the 10-18, the Sigma 17-70 and the Canon EF 70-300 II IS. Combined with my very light weight EOS 77D, and 24mm Pancake, I can go from a stealthy street observer and documentary Photographer to creating artistic views using my wide lens, capture almost everything with the excellent 17-70, and really get nature, sports as well as birds in flight with the 70-300. Thanks for showing the respect for this format and the variety of lenses available without breaking the bank. Even the lowest performing EF lenses would always perform in the f5.6-f11 range and yield results nearly indistinguishable from Premium lens. Those expensive lenses are built for the extremes like very low light or very fast moving subjects or platforms requiring high Shutter speeds. They are priced accordingly.
@@bar1721 I can get a similar output at those SS as well. And super sharp as well for a budget zoom lens. I honestly think Canon should bundle that lens with their APSC cameras or a 24mm f/2.8. Either bundle a sharp wide angle lens or a great zoom lens.
My Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 may not be the sharpest, or the most silent, but it's fast and it's going strong after many years of weddings and night clubs. I absolutely love it.
I have a Rebel T7. Here's my collection so far: - 50mm f/1.8. Lots of fun so far, only had it a few weeks but I understand why it's so popular - upgraded the kit lens (18-55mm IS II, so pre-STM) to Canon's 18-135mm STM. I debated back and forth between that and the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.4-4 but realized I tend to value the reach more than a faster aperture. - Canon's 55-250mm STM. I'm kinda surprised you didn't mention this one. It's not super fast (f/4-5.6) but image quality and construction is on point especially for the price. I picked up my copy off Amazon last summer for around $180 CAD.
Suggestion for next video: if i bought a Nikon Z50 with FTZ adapter today, which F mount lenses should i buy next to supplements the lack of option for budget friendly lens in the Z mount. 2 to 3 lens to complete a travel kit. Ultra wide, tele zoom, fast prime.
7 artisans 7.5mm f2.8 efm mount is really mega value at $130. It’s manual focus but you can pretty much set it to infinity and leave it at that if you’re not shooting things up close. The Canon ef equivalent is about 6 times the price.
My recommendations would be the 🔹 Canon 10-18 & Canon 50 1.8 as they are cheap and comes in a bundle and you can begin with your kit lens plus these two to go on as a beginner. But if you're a Mid pro I would recommend the Holy trinity of lenses ! 🔹 Sigma 18-35 F1.8 🔹 Sigma 24-70 F2.8 🔹 Sigma 70-200 F2.8 these three lens are sufficient for most of the situations and can save your bucks rather than going for the OE lenses. And even going further, you can get the below telephoto which is great or the advanced version as said in video you can go for the sports series if needed. 🔹 Sigma 150-600 F5-6.3 Hope this helps! ✌😁
If I’m grabbing one lens, I go with my 18-135 - the only disadvantage it has compared to the 18-55mm kit lens is minimum focus distance (39mm vs. 25mm). If I’m not sure what I’ll need, I add in my Canon 50mm 1.8 and 55-250mm. With this combination Unusually I find I’m more limited by the aperture rather than focal range (although that sigma 150-600 definitely seems interesting!)
Best value? Canon 50mm 1.8 STM Canon 60mm 2.8 USM Macro Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM Lens Canon 55-250 4-5.6 IS STM Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM What not to buy under $500? *NEVER* buy the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III ever. ever. Its the worst lens ever made in every single way. Just get the Canon 55-250 4-5.6 IS STM at the same price point. Yes you lose 50mm but you gain a massive a mount of sharpness, less distortion, extremely quick auto focus, hardly any chromatic aberration and image stabilization.
@@ziginox the 700-300 usm nano is better in every aspect you might think of... IS, blazing fast and accurate AF, sharpness, etc. But it all comes with a higher price tag.
Fish Creek Park looks amazing any time of the year! I use my Canon T5 with EF-S 55-250mm lens to capture images of the same deer and bald eagles in the park, mostly from across the river. On a few lucky occasions, the eagles perch on the same side of the river and I can get some spectacular shots. We are watching a mating pair getting ready to hatch a new batch of eaglets in the next month. I compare bits of information on them with the other bird enthusiasts I meet along the river. Looking forward to this season!
Nice video that is relevant to a lot of people interesting in getting the most photography at a limited budget! Worth making a part 2 from the comments! My selection which I adapt to my Fuji bodies: the mentioned 10-18 (even used it with bounce flash in a "night club" setting =P - lucky there were white ceilings) 60 F2.8 macro (1:1 macro on the cheap!) 85 F1.8 (great for portraits, the Yongnuo 100 is not supported by the Fringer adapter) 17-55 F2.8 (great "pro grade" event lens) and I had a 200mm F2.8 and 40mm F2.8 lying around which work great (not a fan of 40mm on APS-C but the 200 is gorgeous for portrait)
I’ve been using the sigma 17-70 on my 80D since 2016, and I’m always impressed by the sharpness and performance (especially stopped down at least 1 stop), and comparing to a few L lens I have. It is easily sharper than the 18-55 or 18-135. One downside though is the af does make more noise - not terrible, but enough that even with an mic mounted on the camera it’ll pick up some clicking. Still at around $500 it’s the best mid range zoom for Canon in my opinion. Also, since “budget” you included the sigma 150-600, I’d also throw in the Tamron 100-400. It’s just a bit smaller (AND lighter) as my canon 70-200 2.8 IS, so perfect for travel, fairly sharp 1/3 stop down (at 400)...and, if you watch for the right sale, is $1000 Canadian. Only downside is AF is a bit slow if BIF photos are the main goal.
I strongly considered that one vs Canon 18-135mm. I have the 55-250, but wanted some overlap. I tend to shoot outdoors so I went with the 18-135mm, just for a bit less lens swapping and it was a bit cheaper too.
Another option if you are looking for a kit lens upgrade. Look for a second hand version of the canon 17-55mm f2.8. Decently fast throughout, excellent quality, and can be found in like new condition for about 400 dollars. And of course everyone has mentioned it already, but the value for quality on the 55-250 stm is insane.
Thank you! Really appreciate the video as I am as the many who are looking for budget EF, EFS lenses for Canon. It's good that you mentioned ones from Tamron and Sigma! Again, thanks a lot!
Agreed on the 10-18mm IS STM as being a great bang-for-your-bucks UW EF-S lens, especially as it comes with very effective Image Stabilisation!!! But you also missed another great and also very cheap EF-S lens imo: the 55-250mm IS STM which is cheap, compact, light but it also delivers on the optical side! Not very fast, but that is compensated again by very effective Image Stabilisation. Highly recommended!
I think you missed one awesome APSC lens. The Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens. If they put red rings on APSC lenses, that one would surely get it. Sharp as a tack, and a good aperture for crop-sensors. Granted, at 900 bucks, it's a lot for APSC, but the results justify the cost. ..Joe
I've had some incredible luck with combining the Viltrox speedbooster with EF lenses and I'm sure a lot of canon mirrorless owners would like to see what combinations you can comeup with. My current Killer combo is Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Aspherical XR Di LD VC + Viltrox speed booster = 32-341mm f/2.5-5.3.
Samyang / Rokinon 135mm f2, a manual prime lens that is very very good. The Samyang / Rokinon 85mm f1.4 is very good too. Manual lenses, without stabilizer and cheap if you find them in the used market.
Everything would be fine, but third-party lenses do not always find common ground with SLR cameras, I have Sigma 17-70mm, 18-35mm, F1.8, 8-16mm, the biggest problems were with 18-35mm. My Nikon D5500 camera, I went this way from cost savings. And happy
*EF-S 10-22 USM* was introduced earlier, cost and sharpness around the same, but pretty faster (f/3.5-4.5) and wider range. STM and IS might be the points for 10-18, though.
I've got the far end covered (18-135, 55-250) and want to get the 10-18 or similar next. I just wish there was a bit of overlap, so if you're shooting at 18, or at 55, you might have to switch lenses a bit to find the best one for the shot. 10-22, 17-70, 55-250mm would be ideal. Might as well wish they're all constant f/2.4 aperture USM models while I'm at it 🤣
@@timelord2222 yeah, which is why the wide aperture part was a wish. Even a wider variable aperture like Sigma's 17-70mm is a step up in price wise compared to Canon's entry zooms that typically sit at 3.5-5.6. The better glass and faster apertures do come with a price tag
Big issue for budget conscious shooters on canon EF is the lack of ability to adapt vintage glass easily, eg FD mount, M42 etc. Lots of these vintage lenses can be very affordable for the image quality and especially for hobbyist shooters who don't require absolute peak sharpness and resolution for cropping in or post-processing they offer fantastic value. I love shooting my takumars and Helios on my x-t30.
With a $20 adapter you can use M42. I use Pentax SMC and also Pentax K lenses with Canon EOS. The main problem is focusing them. Mirrorless is far easier as you can punch in and use focus peaking.
@@rsmith02 this is true on most systems, EF works but you can have compatibility issues with lenses which protrude backwards from the mount and impact the mirror. Also depending on the adaptor infinity focus can be an issue. More versatile than Nikon for sure though!
The Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM ... yes, I know, it’s a 35, but don’t worry, it’s the equivalent of a 56 ... for a true macro it's just about the most affordable out there. And for a true macro it’s easy to use because the depth of field is manageable due to the short focal length. And the inbuilt “ring” light is quite useful. Even though it’s not a full ring, but only like “( + )”.
Still trying to understand that model. The EF-S 60mm costs less, and for macro I'd be using a tripod and better, external lighting anyway, no? I understand that the 35 would have a decisive advantage in not needing to focus stack, potentially.
@@thenexthobbyI'm not trying to persuade you to choose any particular lens. If you like the 60, fine! I own and like them both, as well as my three other macro lenses (actually my Sigma 150mm is probably my favourite). The reason why I mentioned the 35 is because in my country as well as in the US the 60 is a little more expensive than the 35. ($349 vs $299 at B&H) Especially if you want a lens hood for it (the 35 comes with a hood). The 60 has no IS, the 35 has IS. And I just find the 35 a very easy and enjoyable lens to work with. But they’re both excellent. I mostly do not use a tripod for macro, except with my Venus Laowa 25mm 2.5 -5 X Ultra Macro. As far as light goes a real flash can freeze motion which the inbuilt ring-light cannot. But for a steady subject, the ring-light is not bad.
Nice list! I either do or have owned all of these except for the 70-210, I have a 70-200 f2.8 for that. I am glad the 17-70 Sigma gets a mention, everyone always goes for the 17-50 2.8 but I prefer the 17-70, it is an underrated lens.
I recently purchased the Canon 10-18mm zoom. I am very happy with it. Very sharp and light weight. You left out the Tamron 18-400mm zoom. I’ve had one for over year now. It works extremely well with my Canon 80D. At $799.00 CAD it is a good deal.
I used once a 28-135mm full frame lens in combination with a 150-600C sigma, gave me more or less everything except wide angle for "just" around 800€ What interested me before the 150-600 sigma was the 60-600 sports, but in a shop just the weight of the lens alone was TOO MUCH, so even the 150-600C was at some point too heavy. Now im using mainly a Canon 100-400 II (much better than the sigma and in my opinion even better than the RF 100-500L!) and a RF 800 F11 if it really has to be light without tripod. In combination with a Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 and a cheaped out sigma 10-20mm i cant say i miss anything except probably a Sigma 18-35 1.8 for special usecases.
I think the Tamron 18-400 is the best choice for a person's second lens. Sharp enough for most, no need to change lenses on an outting. And you can find out what focal lengths you use the most for purchasing prime lenses later. For many, the Tamron plus the kit lens may be all you ever need. Using the kit lens for when you want a smaller lighter package. Or add the pancake lens for ultimate down sizing.
There are some lenses to mention: EF-S 60mm 2.8 Macro lens, basically the macro oriented nifty fifty and the 2.8 aperture also gives a nice bokeh for portraits and somewhat usable in low light, still super small and light EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM.... more on the expensive side, but a hella awesome lens, for ANYTHING. EF 75-300 IS USM (on DSLRs, NOT recommended on mirrorless) , the old 75-300 is sometimes for a good reason sold cheaply... it doesnt work well on mirrorless (Autofocus very problematic), but its awesome on DSLRs so you can get sometimes one for cheap (a lot better than the 55-250 APS-C lenses!) from owners upgrading to mirrorless EF 50 1.4.... "good" lens, just make sure its a cheap and working one, the 1.4 aperture wont get cheaper on Canon with autofocus. On APS-C you also make sure you are not pixel peeping (its not sharp or good with CA)
About a month ago I bought a Nikon Z mount to Canon adapter & the Canon 20mm pancake for my Z50 & the 40mm pancake for my Z7 .... The price was quite low, auto focus fast, with the adapter's foot removed quite small, and IQ impressive! Nikon is due to release their own pancakes sometime in the future, I doubt if I'll be purchasing them when they actually become available..
I’m looking to get a 35mm for my new camera, is the yongnuo 35mm worth it for a beginner or is it just a terrible lens that I’m better staying away from?
@@godofhope I own the same lens and I did not run into any focusing problems that I had to use micro adjustments but it is not a guarantee to every individual lens (i.c.w. camera). It's as I mentioned in another comment a very versatile lens.
On a Canon FF, the Tamron 70-210 f/4, the 70-200 2.8G2, the 24-70 2.8 G2 are excellent lenses. For the wide angle, I shoot with the 17-40 which is still a great lens under 30MP, of course the 16-35 are better in each and every way, but if you're on a budget the former can deliver great landscape shots, great sunstars, great flare resistance and build quality and it's the lightest lens in my backpack! Also, for telephoto: Tamron 100-400 is a steal, very good lens for the price, like 1/3 of a Canon 100-400 but not that far off in terms of quality, and of course the 150-600. I know also the new 35 is a very nice lens but I didn't have the chance of shooting with it yet
How's Canon's 17-35 compare to any of the three 16-35's they've made over the years, or to the 17-40? I'd likely shoot indoors with speedlight or anything outdoors. I'm tired of trying to use fast primes indoors thinking they're fast enough -- they really aren't. So I'm learning to use artificial light as smartly as a I can, even with casual snapshots. I would like to "settle" on one of them (used is preferable) for both my old film bodies and an older APS-C mount camera. That said, a 16-35 2.8 isn't realistic for me due to cost.
@@thenexthobby the 2.8 are all quite pricey, so you'd be better with a third party if you need that. The 17-35 is very old and less sharp than the 17-40, the 16-35 f/4 is on the verge of affordability (for me) so I'd probably pick that, for a FF tho. If you plan on using it on an aps-c, I'd pick an aps-c specific lens
You named some really good lenses. I own the 18-135mm, 10-18mm and the 17-70mm sigma. Most don't mention that particular sigma and it is definitely one of my go to lenses for event video shooting. Never knew about that yongnuo 100mm f2. I'm cheap, so I may have to scoop that one
pleas help I am not getting it are the EF lenses APS-C or full-frame if they are a full-frame this is mean for example that is the 50mm 1.8f ef on canon crop is 80mm 2.8f is this true?
The HUGE problem with Canon EF-S / APS-C is, that they didn´t upgrade the more interesting lenses with Nano USM or STM. Like the older EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM for example (which they could easily upgrade with a new motor, new optical stabilisation and most important - better sealing). Beside: APS-C (aka EF-S) got the last new lenses end of 2016 / start of 2017 (with the mentioned 18-55 F4-5.6 and the quite nice 35mm 2.8 Macro - With the small ring light at the front). But thats it - Since then Canon ignored the APS-C lineup completely. So not only Sony ignored their APS / crop lineup ^^. Btw.: I use the 10-18, 24 STM, 40 STM, 50 STM lenses - All delivering good quality images. But if someone is searching for zoom lenses, then also check out the 55-250mm IS STM zoom. Quite nice too. PLUS: The 18-135mm IS STM is not THAT great. The 18-135mm Nano USM is way better (and also quite affordable used). Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.0 is (sadly) not usable for video at all (its not designed for it motor wise). The same with the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 17-50 F2.8 variants (also Sigma could have updated their 17-50mm ages ago - But didn´t do it). Overall the lineup is "ok". But nothing more. Modern mirrorless-systems are coming with WAY better and more interesting lenses. Buing into Canon APS-C is not really making any sense anymore. WAY better lenses to mention a few in other systems (used by myself already): Fuji-X mount 18-55 F2.8-4.0, Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 and Panasonic 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 (both Micro 4/3 and quite affordable), Sony 18-105 F4 (E mount - not perfect optically - But great built quality and PERFECT for video use). PLUS a few others which are more expensive (but at least AVAILABLE as an option) - Like the new (very good) Sony 16-55 F2.8 for E-Mount (APS / crop) or the super versatile Olympus 12-100mm F4 for Micro 4/3. For Canon EF-S / APS-C you don´t even get a higher performing lens (even if you want to). And full frame you need at least the 24-105mm F4 USM (Mk-2) - Not very comfortable on APS-C. Overall I would rather invest in a system camera setup. Btw.: I use my actual lenses on Fuji-X (X-H1 with the Fringer Pro adapter). Working great on there. And combined with the 18-55 F2.8-4.0 kit lens its a VERY nice kit overall - Fully recommended (especially if you have those lenses already lying around ^^.)
I got lucky, I got a used 17-55 F2.8 with dust inside. It saved me $200 and took 15 minutes to open three screws at the front element and clean it out. So from a different perspective, the imperfection of the lens (not dust sealed) saved me a lot of money in the used market while still giving me a great lens. And of course I use it on Fuji bodies with AF on the sensor, not Canon EF-S bodies that are missing autofocus microadjust.
I switched to Nikon since the release of the D750, but I still have all my Canon gear. I really love a couple of their budget-oriented lenses: the 24 2.8 Stm and the 55-250 STM. But others too. Also the 50 1.8 is definitely a little gem. I bought a 18/55 stm as a light alternative to the 17/55 2.8 which is a little bulky, and I was actually surprised from the results. Canon knows how to give their customers the possibility to shoot good photos even with cheap lenses. I am not sure that, at the moment, Sony/Olympus/Panasonic but also CaNikon recent mirrorless lineups can offer the same bang for our bucks. That's why I stick with DSLRs. Happy weekend 😊
!8-55 when I started youtube I bought the SL2 and I went through three of those, tripod got knock over etc, the camera store calls me the kit lens killer. Two you didn't mention the pancake lenses the 24mm and 40mm.
looks like I need to spend a grand if I want to really reach out there, I have an older 100-300 zoom lens from canon that I got when I was learning and its served its purpose for $100 but it does fall short some times.
![[Live สด] การออกรางวัลสลากกินแบ่งรัฐบาล งวดวันที่ 16 พฤศจิกายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wPd7VFfWHIA/mqdefault.jpg)
How dare you pull focus to me when I was just minding my own business! 🤓😜💜
2:53 I always knew you were a Disney Princess.
So cool
The Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM is an absolute must-have for Canon crop sensor DSLRs. It is such a joy to use! Forget the 18-135.
Reverse mount Canon EOS DSLR to the EF-S 55-250mm using Movo AF (Auto Focus) Reverse Mount Macro Lens Converter for Canon EOS DSLR and you will have the best and most versatile "MACRO ZOOM LENS". YOU can even mount a Canon macro ring flash to this rig.
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is my go-to lens on my Canon 80D! Acceptably sharp at f/2.8, very sharp when stopped down to f/4-5.6, has OIS (though not as good as Canon's), very usable eqv focal length of 27-80mm and reasonable weight. Great lens to travel around with. Only problem is the autofocus doesn't support in-body settings. In HK it can be had for around USD $250.
The Canon 55-250mm is a great lens with a good reach. Very affordable as well.
I agree. I use it on my C200 and it's brilliant. I sold my 70-200 L IS and keep the 55-250 because it's so much more manageable. Just make sure it's the STM version.
Yes, bought used one for 50$, not for shooting in low light, but for that price i cant complain.
Great lens, but you gotta look for the is stm version, which is best optically and with fast internal focus, got mine for like 80€ shipped in mint condition, really great value, even for portrait work
Has good macro magnification as well..
I agree with you guys with the 55-250 EF-S STM lens, superb budget lens. It's only $179 on Amazon. It's a No-brainer
Whenever I watch a DPReview TV video, I just feel want go out there taking photos. Thanks guys to keep high people's interest in photography. I think APS-C Refelx cameras are still good photographic tools, and this kind of buying guides are always welcome. As for Pentax, being the only brand exclusively committed to reflex camerasn (and being myself a Pentaxian), I think it deserve a lenses buying guide like this. Greetings from Japan
My favourite lens for my canon APS-C is the sigma 17-50 f2.8, it’s a great lens for photography
What do you guys use it for mostly? A friend has an F mount version that he's looking to get rid of and I wanted to see if it fit somewhere in my lineup... I have mostly a couple of primes and the Canon 55-250 EFS lens.
Akshay Anand I use it for landscapes, buildings, street and portraits. It’s autofocus is slow and noisy, so video and moving subjects it’s not really good for.
Akshay Anand also if you have a STM 18-55 kit Lens I probably wouldn’t spend the money unless you are getting it cheap because the kit lens is almost as good
How does it compare to the sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 anybody know?
Eli Kotkes I think the main difference is the faster aperture to be honest, I use my sigma over my kit lens almost every time. It is a fair bit heavier and bigger in comparison though but I only use it on a tripod. Like I said b4 if you already own a stm 18-55 kit lens it may not be worth the upgrade unless you want that faster aperture.
Their list:
0. EFS 18-55mm f4-5.6 IS STM ($250, kit lens)
1. EFS 10-18mm f4.5-5.6 IS STM ($299)
2. EFS 24mm f2.8 STM ($150, 🥞)
3. EF 50mm f1.8 STM ($130)
4. EFS 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS STM ($549)
5. Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 OS C ($499)
6. Tamron 70-210mm f4 VC ($799)
7. Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 OS C ($1089)
8. Yongnuo 100mm f2 ($199)
I would add the Canon EF-S 55-250 IS STM + add a 58 2.2X Tele converter filter lens and get 121-550mm telephoto for just about $200 (used)
Reverse mount the Canon EOS DSLR to the EF-S 55-250mm using Movo AF (Auto Focus) Reverse Mount Macro Lens Converter for Canon EOS DSLR and you will have the best and most versatile "MACRO ZOOM LENS". YOU can even mount a Canon macro ring flash to this rig.
The 85mm f1.8 is very solid for the money, especially when bought used. Mine only cost me $320.
Yes, i used the yongnuo 100mm but it had issues focusing, and found mint Canon 85/1.8 for 190€, great value and it transitions well to ff camera as well 🤔
Can you shoot it wide open and be sharp? I know with the 50mm f1.8 I have to stop down to at least 2.2 to get sharp images.
@@christopherpackart it is pretty sharp, even on crop sensor, just the purple fringing is somewhat problem 🤔 for me 35/2 is usm is sharpest from my primes, even wide open
@@EpicDubstepManiac i had also focusing issues with the 100mm youngnuo too and not compatible with m50 (makes wierd things, camera locks up, fails to focus)
I had problem where it would not focus near infinity, indoor was ok, worked with nd filter for whatever reason but when i wanted to shoot something 20+ meters away i could not, if you can find 85mm under 200€ sell that yongnuo while you can, it will be worthless with mirrorless cameras
2:52 In Canada, even a bird will humble like this
3 out of 4 of my lenses, not bad at all. Especially the sigma 17-70 is very versatile, use it a lot. Better in low light and better range than a kit lens - nice entry macro capabilities - sharpness and bokeh at 70mm is quiet nice so even portraits are greatly possible. Thank you for another great video
Efs 55-250 stm is missing.
Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art. For what it delivers it’s very reasonable.
ya, not a cheap lens. but great bang for buck
81 Springbrook it’s probably the only APSC lens work taking between systems. On a camera like the EOS R and C200, Blackmagic etc it works well with cropped 4K
@@81springbrook96 Got mine 2nd hand in mint condition so price OK and very happy with it on my 80D
@@SteveP_2426 How much did you pay ? Is it hard to focus? I heard the Sigma 18--35 has focusing issues sometimes unless you have the USB Dock
@@TheMindedOnes I can't remember now as it was 18months ago and I chopped in some lenses to offset the cost. I got it from mpb and it was a mint condition one. I did buy the docking hub on amazon as it was a reasonable price - cheaper than the Tamron docking station. I've run it a couple of times on the Sigma hub but only the first time was there an update. I've heard people like Tony Nortrup slag off the lens for focusing but on by Canon 8OD the AF works a treat - although I'm a stills guy not a video guy. On my APSC it's equivalent to an f2.8 Full Frame so have got some good blue hour shots and even got a half decent Milky Way image when stacking several shots. It's probably the lens I use most but it's not light so you might not take it on a long hike.
You should've got Gerald in the "crying fetal" pose. 😂😁
Oh HELL YEAAAAHH
Gerald cries for no one.
I switched from canon to Fuji a year or so ago and while I do have some Fuji glass, I still use my 10-18, 24, and 50 adapted to Fuji with a Fringer Pro because they're superb for the money. To get the equivalent in Fuji is beyond my wallet capabilities so those lenses aren't just great for canon apsc 😁
Any issues with continuous autofocus?
Thank God Chris’ tan pants are back. I was honestly worried.
I will never leave you in a world where tan pants cease to exist or be worn.
An honorable mention could've been the Canon EF-S 15-85mm. You can get it used in Europe for about €250, it has the best image quality of all EF-S zooms, it is solidly build, has extremely effective image stabilisation and the focal length is a dream for travel.
With all of the upgraded lenses I have, I still shoot with the 50 1.8 STM! It's in my bag next to my 85 1.8 and either a 35 1.4 or 24 1.4. It's such a great lens, ESPECIALLY when you add the price. I'll say that the 85 1.8 is also one of my favorites. It's so old now, that I got it for $240 and it's been one of my favorite lenses I have ever bought.
You shoot aps-c, ff & / or both ?
@@jordymaas565 both. I currently have a Canon 6D, a Sony audio, and a Fuji X100V. The Canon gets the least love now but I take it when I'd be afraid of losing or damaging the others (or nightscapes)
One of the reasons why I picked a Canon DSLR over a Sony mirrorless 6 years ago.
So many affordable, good quality, native lenses. All 4 of my lenses are entry-level Canon lenses.
The EF 70-300 II IS is a great lens, and on an AS-C body it has the effective Focal length of 110 to 480mm. That's a lot of reach. With modern DIGIC 8 handling higher ISO's, this lens is affordable and performs quite well for Sports and wildlife. My APS-C kit includes the 10-18, the Sigma 17-70 and the Canon EF 70-300 II IS. Combined with my very light weight EOS 77D, and 24mm Pancake, I can go from a stealthy street observer and documentary Photographer to creating artistic views using my wide lens, capture almost everything with the excellent 17-70, and really get nature, sports as well as birds in flight with the 70-300. Thanks for showing the respect for this format and the variety of lenses available without breaking the bank. Even the lowest performing EF lenses would always perform in the f5.6-f11 range and yield results nearly indistinguishable from Premium lens. Those expensive lenses are built for the extremes like very low light or very fast moving subjects or platforms requiring high Shutter speeds. They are priced accordingly.
You've missed the EF-S 55-250 IS STM. Doesn't get better in terms of bang for buck.
i use one with eos m100, optical image stabilization works wonderfull. I can get sharp images at 250mm using times like 1/50 of a second.
Bartlomiej Milewski good for you
@@bar1721 I can get a similar output at those SS as well. And super sharp as well for a budget zoom lens. I honestly think Canon should bundle that lens with their APSC cameras or a 24mm f/2.8. Either bundle a sharp wide angle lens or a great zoom lens.
This is my favourite lens for Canon! Sharper than my 70-200f4L, very usable OIS and very nice close up capabilities!
You can get the 10-18 and 50 in a kit for $350. It’s an amazing bargain.
My Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 may not be the sharpest, or the most silent, but it's fast and it's going strong after many years of weddings and night clubs. I absolutely love it.
I have a Rebel T7. Here's my collection so far:
- 50mm f/1.8. Lots of fun so far, only had it a few weeks but I understand why it's so popular
- upgraded the kit lens (18-55mm IS II, so pre-STM) to Canon's 18-135mm STM. I debated back and forth between that and the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.4-4 but realized I tend to value the reach more than a faster aperture.
- Canon's 55-250mm STM. I'm kinda surprised you didn't mention this one. It's not super fast (f/4-5.6) but image quality and construction is on point especially for the price. I picked up my copy off Amazon last summer for around $180 CAD.
Suggestion for next video: if i bought a Nikon Z50 with FTZ adapter today, which F mount lenses should i buy next to supplements the lack of option for budget friendly lens in the Z mount. 2 to 3 lens to complete a travel kit. Ultra wide, tele zoom, fast prime.
This is a great question actually. I know there is some good apsc Nikon F mount glass but knowing how well it works on the z50 would be great.
Pentax is so underrated. Their apsc slr's have ibis and high resolution mode. Feature packed at a great price.
My main concern in investing in Pentax system are the frequent rumours of their possible leaving the photographic sector. I like the K-P quite a lot.
7 artisans 7.5mm f2.8 efm mount is really mega value at $130. It’s manual focus but you can pretty much set it to infinity and leave it at that if you’re not shooting things up close. The Canon ef equivalent is about 6 times the price.
My recommendations would be the
🔹 Canon 10-18 & Canon 50 1.8
as they are cheap and comes in a bundle and you can begin with your kit lens plus these two to go on as a beginner.
But if you're a Mid pro I would recommend the Holy trinity of lenses !
🔹 Sigma 18-35 F1.8
🔹 Sigma 24-70 F2.8
🔹 Sigma 70-200 F2.8
these three lens are sufficient for most of the situations and can save your bucks rather than going for the OE lenses.
And even going further, you can get the below telephoto which is great or the advanced version as said in video you can go for the sports series if needed.
🔹 Sigma 150-600 F5-6.3
Hope this helps! ✌😁
What do u think about the sigma 17-50 , thinking about it for videos and some photography
If I’m grabbing one lens, I go with my 18-135 - the only disadvantage it has compared to the 18-55mm kit lens is minimum focus distance (39mm vs. 25mm). If I’m not sure what I’ll need, I add in my Canon 50mm 1.8 and 55-250mm. With this combination Unusually I find I’m more limited by the aperture rather than focal range (although that sigma 150-600 definitely seems interesting!)
Yes, definitely Pentax! I no longer shoot Canon, but this was an interesting and informative video that should be extended to other brands.
DP Review editorial philosophy: "not many people use Pentax"
Pentax: "also, smartphones exist, but you curiously don't talk about them much"
Best value?
Canon 50mm 1.8 STM
Canon 60mm 2.8 USM Macro
Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM Lens
Canon 55-250 4-5.6 IS STM
Canon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM
What not to buy under $500?
*NEVER* buy the Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III ever. ever. Its the worst lens ever made in every single way.
Just get the Canon 55-250 4-5.6 IS STM at the same price point. Yes you lose 50mm but you gain a massive a mount of sharpness, less distortion, extremely quick auto focus, hardly any chromatic aberration and image stabilization.
Can confirm. That 75-300mm is an awful lens. I wonder how the 70-300mm version compares?
@@ziginox the 700-300 usm nano is better in every aspect you might think of... IS, blazing fast and accurate AF, sharpness, etc. But it all comes with a higher price tag.
are you joking? That lens is fantastic. One of my fav kit lenses ever.
Please do Sony next... Although you may need to invent lenses to stay within budget
this. also please include adapted lenses or manual lenses too if the choice aren't that many.
Fish Creek Park looks amazing any time of the year! I use my Canon T5 with EF-S 55-250mm lens to capture images of the same deer and bald eagles in the park, mostly from across the river. On a few lucky occasions, the eagles perch on the same side of the river and I can get some spectacular shots. We are watching a mating pair getting ready to hatch a new batch of eaglets in the next month. I compare bits of information on them with the other bird enthusiasts I meet along the river. Looking forward to this season!
Nice video that is relevant to a lot of people interesting in getting the most photography at a limited budget! Worth making a part 2 from the comments! My selection which I adapt to my Fuji bodies:
the mentioned 10-18 (even used it with bounce flash in a "night club" setting =P - lucky there were white ceilings)
60 F2.8 macro (1:1 macro on the cheap!)
85 F1.8 (great for portraits, the Yongnuo 100 is not supported by the Fringer adapter)
17-55 F2.8 (great "pro grade" event lens)
and I had a 200mm F2.8 and 40mm F2.8 lying around which work great (not a fan of 40mm on APS-C but the 200 is gorgeous for portrait)
I’ve been using the sigma 17-70 on my 80D since 2016, and I’m always impressed by the sharpness and performance (especially stopped down at least 1 stop), and comparing to a few L lens I have. It is easily sharper than the 18-55 or 18-135. One downside though is the af does make more noise - not terrible, but enough that even with an mic mounted on the camera it’ll pick up some clicking. Still at around $500 it’s the best mid range zoom for Canon in my opinion. Also, since “budget” you included the sigma 150-600, I’d also throw in the Tamron 100-400. It’s just a bit smaller (AND lighter) as my canon 70-200 2.8 IS, so perfect for travel, fairly sharp 1/3 stop down (at 400)...and, if you watch for the right sale, is $1000 Canadian. Only downside is AF is a bit slow if BIF photos are the main goal.
Sigma 17-70mm is my favorite go to lens. Affordable, awesome zoom range and good aperture range. Definitely a big step up from the Kit 18-55mm
I strongly considered that one vs Canon 18-135mm. I have the 55-250, but wanted some overlap. I tend to shoot outdoors so I went with the 18-135mm, just for a bit less lens swapping and it was a bit cheaper too.
Another option if you are looking for a kit lens upgrade. Look for a second hand version of the canon 17-55mm f2.8. Decently fast throughout, excellent quality, and can be found in like new condition for about 400 dollars. And of course everyone has mentioned it already, but the value for quality on the 55-250 stm is insane.
Thank you! Really appreciate the video as I am as the many who are looking for budget EF, EFS lenses for Canon. It's good that you mentioned ones from Tamron and Sigma! Again, thanks a lot!
I am using 24mm/2.8 and 50 mm/1.8, on Canon 1200 D
Agreed on the 10-18mm IS STM as being a great bang-for-your-bucks UW EF-S lens, especially as it comes with very effective Image Stabilisation!!! But you also missed another great and also very cheap EF-S lens imo: the 55-250mm IS STM which is cheap, compact, light but it also delivers on the optical side! Not very fast, but that is compensated again by very effective Image Stabilisation. Highly recommended!
The Signa 17-70 and Tamron 70-210 are in my list for my Nikon and Canon camera's.
THANK YOU. Finally reviewing gear in my price range (although I still watched the reviews of the $11K 600mm f/4 lenses).
Would love to see a video on Pentax lenses, they have an amazing portfolio!
I think you missed one awesome APSC lens. The Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens. If they put red rings on APSC lenses, that one would surely get it. Sharp as a tack, and a good aperture for crop-sensors. Granted, at 900 bucks, it's a lot for APSC, but the results justify the cost.
..Joe
The 15-85mm is my favorite lens.
Gerald Undone?! He's CRAZY!
and he returned to his old Camera store....
Great advice. I'd add the 55-250/4-5.6 IS STM and maybe the Sigma 30/1.4 DC HSM Art.
I've had some incredible luck with combining the Viltrox speedbooster with EF lenses and I'm sure a lot of canon mirrorless owners would like to see what combinations you can comeup with. My current Killer combo is Tamron 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Aspherical XR Di LD VC + Viltrox speed booster = 32-341mm f/2.5-5.3.
Samyang / Rokinon 135mm f2, a manual prime lens that is very very good. The Samyang / Rokinon 85mm f1.4 is very good too. Manual lenses, without stabilizer and cheap if you find them in the used market.
I've just bought the 75-300 F4 III for £50 for adapting to my Sony 6300 and so far I love it.
Everything would be fine, but third-party lenses do not always find common ground with SLR cameras, I have Sigma 17-70mm, 18-35mm, F1.8, 8-16mm, the biggest problems were with 18-35mm. My Nikon D5500 camera, I went this way from cost savings. And happy
Please do a video on the best penny-farthing bicylces, fax machines or dial-up modems next.
*EF-S 10-22 USM* was introduced earlier, cost and sharpness around the same, but pretty faster (f/3.5-4.5) and wider range. STM and IS might be the points for 10-18, though.
Kit-trinity is the staple of every beginner Canon APS-C photographer: 10-18, 18-55, 55-250
I've got the far end covered (18-135, 55-250) and want to get the 10-18 or similar next. I just wish there was a bit of overlap, so if you're shooting at 18, or at 55, you might have to switch lenses a bit to find the best one for the shot. 10-22, 17-70, 55-250mm would be ideal. Might as well wish they're all constant f/2.4 aperture USM models while I'm at it 🤣
@@AndrewPenner Yes, but constant apertures wouldn't make them the "budget" options then
@@timelord2222 yeah, which is why the wide aperture part was a wish. Even a wider variable aperture like Sigma's 17-70mm is a step up in price wise compared to Canon's entry zooms that typically sit at 3.5-5.6. The better glass and faster apertures do come with a price tag
Big issue for budget conscious shooters on canon EF is the lack of ability to adapt vintage glass easily, eg FD mount, M42 etc. Lots of these vintage lenses can be very affordable for the image quality and especially for hobbyist shooters who don't require absolute peak sharpness and resolution for cropping in or post-processing they offer fantastic value. I love shooting my takumars and Helios on my x-t30.
With a $20 adapter you can use M42. I use Pentax SMC and also Pentax K lenses with Canon EOS. The main problem is focusing them. Mirrorless is far easier as you can punch in and use focus peaking.
@@rsmith02 this is true on most systems, EF works but you can have compatibility issues with lenses which protrude backwards from the mount and impact the mirror. Also depending on the adaptor infinity focus can be an issue. More versatile than Nikon for sure though!
@@rsmith02 If your Canon body supports Magic Lantern, that will give you focus peaking for manual focus lenses.
The Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM ...
yes, I know, it’s a 35, but don’t worry, it’s the equivalent of a 56 ...
for a true macro it's just about the most affordable out there. And for a true macro it’s easy to use because the depth of field is manageable due to the short focal length. And the inbuilt “ring” light is quite useful.
Even though it’s not a full ring, but only like “( + )”.
Still trying to understand that model. The EF-S 60mm costs less, and for macro I'd be using a tripod and better, external lighting anyway, no? I understand that the 35 would have a decisive advantage in not needing to focus stack, potentially.
@@thenexthobbyI'm not trying to persuade you to choose any particular lens. If you like the 60, fine! I own and like them both, as well as my three other macro lenses (actually my Sigma 150mm is probably my favourite). The reason why I mentioned the 35 is because in my country as well as in the US the 60 is a little more expensive than the 35. ($349 vs $299 at B&H) Especially if you want a lens hood for it (the 35 comes with a hood). The 60 has no IS, the 35 has IS. And I just find the 35 a very easy and enjoyable lens to work with. But they’re both excellent. I mostly do not use a tripod for macro, except with my Venus Laowa 25mm 2.5 -5 X Ultra Macro. As far as light goes a real flash can freeze motion which the inbuilt ring-light cannot. But for a steady subject, the ring-light is not bad.
Do one for Nikon DX lenses too!
Nice list! I either do or have owned all of these except for the 70-210, I have a 70-200 f2.8 for that. I am glad the 17-70 Sigma gets a mention, everyone always goes for the 17-50 2.8 but I prefer the 17-70, it is an underrated lens.
Well said! I bought it back in January n it doesn't leave my 📸
Can you do this for Nikon APS-C DSLRs?
I recently purchased the Canon 10-18mm zoom. I am very happy with it. Very sharp and light weight. You left out the Tamron 18-400mm zoom. I’ve had one for over year now. It works extremely well with my Canon 80D. At $799.00 CAD it is a good deal.
I used once a 28-135mm full frame lens in combination with a 150-600C sigma, gave me more or less everything except wide angle for "just" around 800€
What interested me before the 150-600 sigma was the 60-600 sports, but in a shop just the weight of the lens alone was TOO MUCH, so even the 150-600C was at some point too heavy. Now im using mainly a Canon 100-400 II (much better than the sigma and in my opinion even better than the RF 100-500L!) and a RF 800 F11 if it really has to be light without tripod. In combination with a Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 and a cheaped out sigma 10-20mm i cant say i miss anything except probably a Sigma 18-35 1.8 for special usecases.
I think the Tamron 18-400 is the best choice for a person's second lens. Sharp enough for most, no need to change lenses on an outting. And you can find out what focal lengths you use the most for purchasing prime lenses later.
For many, the Tamron plus the kit lens may be all you ever need. Using the kit lens for when you want a smaller lighter package. Or add the pancake lens for ultimate down sizing.
(0:37) I am watching Kingdom from Netflix, and those red marks on the trees are eyesore now.
(6:45) Gerald lives at Alberta!
But the Birdies are so CUTE AND TENDERS!!!! Good video you guys!
I have most of the Cannon lenses you just mentioned. The 55-250mm is a great lens, very sharp.
There are some lenses to mention:
EF-S 60mm 2.8 Macro lens, basically the macro oriented nifty fifty and the 2.8 aperture also gives a nice bokeh for portraits and somewhat usable in low light, still super small and light
EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS USM.... more on the expensive side, but a hella awesome lens, for ANYTHING.
EF 75-300 IS USM (on DSLRs, NOT recommended on mirrorless) , the old 75-300 is sometimes for a good reason sold cheaply... it doesnt work well on mirrorless (Autofocus very problematic), but its awesome on DSLRs so you can get sometimes one for cheap (a lot better than the 55-250 APS-C lenses!) from owners upgrading to mirrorless
EF 50 1.4.... "good" lens, just make sure its a cheap and working one, the 1.4 aperture wont get cheaper on Canon with autofocus. On APS-C you also make sure you are not pixel peeping (its not sharp or good with CA)
Hii...does Sigma 150-600 gives good results if paired with Canon 90D
canon 55-250mm is amazing! I got one for 108$, best budget lens I ever bought.
55-250IS STM, 60 2.8 MACRO USM, 40 2.8 STM.
About a month ago I bought a Nikon Z mount to Canon adapter & the Canon 20mm pancake for my Z50 & the 40mm pancake for my Z7 .... The price was quite low, auto focus fast, with the adapter's foot removed quite small, and IQ impressive! Nikon is due to release their own pancakes sometime in the future, I doubt if I'll be purchasing them when they actually become available..
I’m looking to get a 35mm for my new camera, is the yongnuo 35mm worth it for a beginner or is it just a terrible lens that I’m better staying away from?
this video is so useful, never known about the telephoto lenses
great video! can't wait for the Nikon one :D
Always enjoy these uploads even if I can care less about DSLR subject matter.📷✌🏻👍🏻
I have used the 17-70 C OSS hsm is a great walk around lens and has been the sharpest lens for the money, very happy with it on my eos 7Dii
Tysonator ! Is this lens known for any focussing issues you have to compensate with AF Microadjustment?
@@godofhope I own the same lens and I did not run into any focusing problems that I had to use micro adjustments but it is not a guarantee to every individual lens (i.c.w. camera). It's as I mentioned in another comment a very versatile lens.
I have the mc11 adapter, so I can always do the micro adjustments to make sure it is truly accurate
U both create amazing and useful content for photographer of all ages. I am watching ur videos from camera store tv now in dpreviews...
Yes! I love affordable gear reviews! Thank you so much for this!
Looking for the Nikon versions
When are you going to do a Nikon version of this video
On a Canon FF, the Tamron 70-210 f/4, the 70-200 2.8G2, the 24-70 2.8 G2 are excellent lenses. For the wide angle, I shoot with the 17-40 which is still a great lens under 30MP, of course the 16-35 are better in each and every way, but if you're on a budget the former can deliver great landscape shots, great sunstars, great flare resistance and build quality and it's the lightest lens in my backpack!
Also, for telephoto: Tamron 100-400 is a steal, very good lens for the price, like 1/3 of a Canon 100-400 but not that far off in terms of quality, and of course the 150-600. I know also the new 35 is a very nice lens but I didn't have the chance of shooting with it yet
How's Canon's 17-35 compare to any of the three 16-35's they've made over the years, or to the 17-40? I'd likely shoot indoors with speedlight or anything outdoors. I'm tired of trying to use fast primes indoors thinking they're fast enough -- they really aren't. So I'm learning to use artificial light as smartly as a I can, even with casual snapshots.
I would like to "settle" on one of them (used is preferable) for both my old film bodies and an older APS-C mount camera. That said, a 16-35 2.8 isn't realistic for me due to cost.
@@thenexthobby the 2.8 are all quite pricey, so you'd be better with a third party if you need that. The 17-35 is very old and less sharp than the 17-40, the 16-35 f/4 is on the verge of affordability (for me) so I'd probably pick that, for a FF tho. If you plan on using it on an aps-c, I'd pick an aps-c specific lens
Great video! I bought a Canon 250D (as it is called here in Europe) and this is very informative. Thank you very much!
You named some really good lenses. I own the 18-135mm, 10-18mm and the 17-70mm sigma. Most don't mention that particular sigma and it is definitely one of my go to lenses for event video shooting. Never knew about that yongnuo 100mm f2. I'm cheap, so I may have to scoop that one
I can’t believe you did not mention the best APS-C lens ever made: Sigma 18-35 f/1.8
The title says "best BUDGET lenses"
@@timelord2222 so why on earth did they include the $1000 sigma 150-600 ?
Gustavo Taliano the 70-210 is also more expensive than the 18-35... I consider the 18-35 very affordable
@@aceflibble Have you check prices of wide angle 1.8 zoom lenses? Do you find any under $700 as the sigma?
cant wait to see other brands budget lenses video
Good video. I have taken some of my favorite pictures with that lowly 24mm lens.
Please do this for fuji, nikon and sony as well
Please also do for Fuji and Nikon.
pleas help
I am not getting it
are the EF lenses APS-C or full-frame
if they are a full-frame this is mean for example that is the 50mm 1.8f ef on canon crop is 80mm 2.8f
is this true?
The HUGE problem with Canon EF-S / APS-C is, that they didn´t upgrade the more interesting lenses with Nano USM or STM. Like the older EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM for example (which they could easily upgrade with a new motor, new optical stabilisation and most important - better sealing). Beside: APS-C (aka EF-S) got the last new lenses end of 2016 / start of 2017 (with the mentioned 18-55 F4-5.6 and the quite nice 35mm 2.8 Macro - With the small ring light at the front). But thats it - Since then Canon ignored the APS-C lineup completely. So not only Sony ignored their APS / crop lineup ^^.
Btw.: I use the 10-18, 24 STM, 40 STM, 50 STM lenses - All delivering good quality images. But if someone is searching for zoom lenses, then also check out the 55-250mm IS STM zoom. Quite nice too. PLUS: The 18-135mm IS STM is not THAT great. The 18-135mm Nano USM is way better (and also quite affordable used). Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.0 is (sadly) not usable for video at all (its not designed for it motor wise). The same with the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 17-50 F2.8 variants (also Sigma could have updated their 17-50mm ages ago - But didn´t do it). Overall the lineup is "ok". But nothing more.
Modern mirrorless-systems are coming with WAY better and more interesting lenses. Buing into Canon APS-C is not really making any sense anymore. WAY better lenses to mention a few in other systems (used by myself already): Fuji-X mount 18-55 F2.8-4.0, Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 and Panasonic 12-60mm F2.8-4.0 (both Micro 4/3 and quite affordable), Sony 18-105 F4 (E mount - not perfect optically - But great built quality and PERFECT for video use). PLUS a few others which are more expensive (but at least AVAILABLE as an option) - Like the new (very good) Sony 16-55 F2.8 for E-Mount (APS / crop) or the super versatile Olympus 12-100mm F4 for Micro 4/3. For Canon EF-S / APS-C you don´t even get a higher performing lens (even if you want to). And full frame you need at least the 24-105mm F4 USM (Mk-2) - Not very comfortable on APS-C.
Overall I would rather invest in a system camera setup. Btw.: I use my actual lenses on Fuji-X (X-H1 with the Fringer Pro adapter). Working great on there.
And combined with the 18-55 F2.8-4.0 kit lens its a VERY nice kit overall - Fully recommended (especially if you have those lenses already lying around ^^.)
I got lucky, I got a used 17-55 F2.8 with dust inside. It saved me $200 and took 15 minutes to open three screws at the front element and clean it out. So from a different perspective, the imperfection of the lens (not dust sealed) saved me a lot of money in the used market while still giving me a great lens.
And of course I use it on Fuji bodies with AF on the sensor, not Canon EF-S bodies that are missing autofocus microadjust.
Do one for Nikon DX pleaaaaase!!
yes, please look at Pentax.
I switched to Nikon since the release of the D750, but I still have all my Canon gear. I really love a couple of their budget-oriented lenses: the 24 2.8 Stm and the 55-250 STM. But others too. Also the 50 1.8 is definitely a little gem. I bought a 18/55 stm as a light alternative to the 17/55 2.8 which is a little bulky, and I was actually surprised from the results. Canon knows how to give their customers the possibility to shoot good photos even with cheap lenses. I am not sure that, at the moment, Sony/Olympus/Panasonic but also CaNikon recent mirrorless lineups can offer the same bang for our bucks. That's why I stick with DSLRs. Happy weekend 😊
what about the tamron 35-150mm? is it much better than the 19-200?
What lens should i buy for shooting the moon? TIA :)
Excellent video! Thanks for the information that made me buy a lens I did not know existed.
Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 is great lens for APS-C cameras
Gerald undone is everywhere !
If talking not only native glass, then *Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro* are absolutely stellar for Canon crop.
Tamron 60mm F2 was on our list, but we were unable to find one for this episode.
Hope the 24-85mm makes it on the list for full frame, that is still by far my favorite lens purchase. Nice and small but stupidly sharp and quick.
6:45 for absolute incoqnito add softbox, boombox and dozen paparazzis atleast. Works like a charm.
The 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 are still great lenses.
!8-55 when I started youtube I bought the SL2 and I went through three of those, tripod got knock over etc, the camera store calls me the kit lens killer.
Two you didn't mention the pancake lenses the 24mm and 40mm.
looks like I need to spend a grand if I want to really reach out there, I have an older 100-300 zoom lens from canon that I got when I was learning and its served its purpose for $100 but it does fall short some times.
Lens rental from "the camera store"... Damn🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣