Which first lens for a 60D

Igor

Igor

Messages
232
Name
Igor
Edit My Images
Yes
I got a canon 60D body only for Christmas :)

I already have a canon lens off my old old old 35mm eos700 but it shocking on the D60. It's a sigma 70-210.

So which first lens should I get? I don't want to spend a fortune just yet so I was thinking about a 18-50 kit lens for now.

I've just moved from my Sony alpha camera so I'm completely out of touch with canon

Any advice would be much appreciated

Thanks
 
Last edited:
i would recommend tamron 17-50 non VC 2.8... its a crcking lens for little money and the 60 D with its 18 000 pixels will need a very good lens to bring out its best. Cheaper lens like the kit im afraid might not do it too much justice
 
If budget is an issue i would stick with a kit lens. you can pick them up for around £50.
If you want to go for a better option then the sigma 18-50 2.8 gets my vote as i have that on my d300.

I would go for the kits lens though then maybe extend your focal range to a 70-200 etc at a later date.
 
P-Chan said:
i would recommend tamron 17-50 non VC 2.8... its a crcking lens for little money and the 60 D with its 18 000 pixels will need a very good lens to bring out its best. Cheaper lens like the kit im afraid might not do it too much justice
Click to expand...

I was just looking at this lens. Why the non VC version though? It's only about £30 difference
 
I had the Sigma 17-70 and it was very decent for the price, read good things about the newer OS one too

Fom experience do not buy the Sigma 18-50 variable aperture OS lens, tried one and it was truly awful although the newer 17-50 OS gets good reviews at a much higher price

Might as well be the first one to say it, but push the boat out big time and buy the Canon 17-55 IS. It is the best lens for a crop sensor at that sort of focal length, would have saved me a good few quid if I had bought it straight away
 
Igor said:
I was just looking at this lens. Why the non VC version though? It's only about £30 difference
Click to expand...

read alot before buying and optic wise non vc is better while at that range u dont really need the vc.

canon 17-55 yes is the best lens out there for this range but costs 3 x the tamron but yet is not 3 times better. actually just a bit better.

if u can strecth for 700 pounds get the canon one but at that money u can but the tamron plus 70-200 f4 l canon
 
P-Chan said:
read alot before buying and optic wise non vc is better while at that range u dont really need the vc.

canon 17-55 yes is the best lens out there for this range but costs 3 x the tamron but yet is not 3 times better. actually just a bit better.

if u can strecth for 700 pounds get the canon one but at that money u can but the tamron plus 70-200 f4 l canon
Click to expand...

Yeah I think the tamron is the way to go. Especially when you can get them for £240!!! Pretty gutted that I've already ordered a kit lens for £40. Oh well, it's only cheap lol
 
Igor said:
Yeah I think the tamron is the way to go. Especially when you can get them for £240!!! Pretty gutted that I've already ordered a kit lens for £40. Oh well, it's only cheap lol
Click to expand...


Look on the bright side. Despite being nice and sharp, the tamron isn't built very well, and if it ever breaks, you've got a cheapo back up to replace it till it's fixed.
 
squishy said:
Look on the bright side. Despite being nice and sharp, the tamron isn't built very well, and if it ever breaks, you've got a cheapo back up to replace it till it's fixed.
Click to expand...

come on !!!! the tamy might not be built as a tank but its not that shabby either :nono: :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top