Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

What lens should I get next?

Hi all,

 

I currently own a Canon EOS M10 with the following lenses:

  • Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM
  • Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
  • Canon EF-M 15-45mm IS STM

And I'm thinking about what lens I could get next? I mainly use it for all-round purposes like landscape, street, portrait. I also have an adapter for EF-M to EF(-S).

I'm thinking about the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC or Meike MK-25mm f/1.8. Something like that, I do not wanna spend more than €300.

 

Cheers.

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Zandvliet said:

I do not wanna spend more than €300.

Well there goes that idea.

I was gonna suggest an 85mm f/1.8 but I don't think you can get one under that limit

But a nifty fifty (50mm f/1.8) would fit the bill. Portraits are awesome with one of those.

 

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Radium_Angel said:

Well there goes that idea.

I was gonna suggest an 85mm f/1.8 but I don't think you can get one under that limit

But a nifty fifty (50mm f/1.8) would fit the bill. Portraits are awesome with one of those.

 

Ha, I was also thinking about the 50mm f/1.8. Why would you suggest the 85mm?

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Zandvliet said:

Ha, I was also thinking about the 50mm f/1.8. Why would you suggest the 85mm?

The 85 is excellent for portraits and with the fast aperture (1.8) allows a great deal of  creativity.

But unless you go manual focus, I think they can't be touched for under 600$ (USA money) whereas the 50 can be had for 50-75$ (again, US money)

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

The 85 is excellent for portraits and with the fast aperture (1.8) allows a great deal of  creativity.

But unless you go manual focus, I think they can't be touched for under 600$ (USA money) whereas the 50 can be had for 50-75$ (again, US money)

The 85 is €349 and the 50 is €129. If I get another lens I'm getting the 50mm ;) Also looking into an option to trade the M10 for the M50, although I'm not sure if that's worth it.

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Zandvliet said:

Also looking into an option to trade the M10 for the M50, although I'm not sure if that's worth it.

Can't help you with that choice you filthy stinking communistical Canon user!

 

(checks camera collection...)

 

errr..I take that back you fine upstanding Morally Correct Canon user!

So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Zandvliet said:

The 85 is €349 and the 50 is €129. If I get another lens I'm getting the 50mm ;) Also looking into an option to trade the M10 for the M50, although I'm not sure if that's worth it.

Check the used market as well if you're open to it, or keep an eye for manufacturer refurbished lenses. Looking at Adorama's site for used equipment, I'm seeing the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 for a little north of $300 for an "Excellent" lens. So you may find similar deals in Europe. Definitely can't go wrong with the 50mm, though. That focal length was the first prime lens I bought for my Nikon.

Wife's build: Amethyst - Ryzen 9 3900X, 32GB G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200, ASUS Prime X570-P, EVGA GTX 1080 SC, Corsair Obsidian 750D, Corsair RM1000

My build: Mira - Ryzen 7 3700X, 32GB EVGA DDR4-3200, ASUS Prime X470-PRO, EVGA GTX 1070 SC Black Edition, NZXT H440, EVGA Supernova 1050 GS

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2019 at 7:54 PM, Zandvliet said:

The 85 is €349 and the 50 is €129. If I get another lens I'm getting the 50mm ;) Also looking into an option to trade the M10 for the M50, although I'm not sure if that's worth it.

Personally I find 85 a bit too long on a crop body. As you get longer in focal length people tend to look fatter than they are, and at 85*1.6 that effect starts to creep in. On a FF camera 85 is wonderful. So either go for the nifty fifty or if you fancy having a go at macro too the EF-S 60. Both are excellent lenses and will work well for portraiture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Don't go for the  Tamron 18-200mm its not a great lens. My best advice is to buy the best glass you can. Start with the 24-70 as its a really awesome bit of kit and ideal for  landscape, street, portrait. photography. 

If you want a prime lens then go for the 35mm 0r 50mm, 1.8 depending on if you have have a cropped sensor or not. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2019 at 7:21 PM, Zandvliet said:

Hi all,

 

I currently own a Canon EOS M10 with the following lenses:

  • Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM
  • Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM
  • Canon EF-M 15-45mm IS STM

And I'm thinking about what lens I could get next? I mainly use it for all-round purposes like landscape, street, portrait. I also have an adapter for EF-M to EF(-S).

I'm thinking about the Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC or Meike MK-25mm f/1.8. Something like that, I do not wanna spend more than €300.

 

Cheers.

I would really recommend buying 50mm with f/1.8 or as it's the best for portraits. I personally use Canons 50mm and I'm pretty satisfied. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

based off what you have already I would just look at replacing your 55-200 with whatever will give you a faster iris.  you have 90-95% of the effective range you would want for the styles of photography your talking about so its now about improving the quality of the glass more than anything.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, birdjoy said:

I would really recommend buying 50mm with f/1.8 or as it's the best for portraits. I personally use Canons 50mm and I'm pretty satisfied. 

Alright thanks. I'm thinking about it too.

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Thanatopsis said:

based off what you have already I would just look at replacing your 55-200 with whatever will give you a faster iris.  you have 90-95% of the effective range you would want for the styles of photography your talking about so its now about improving the quality of the glass more than anything.

 

I got that lens only for my safari trip, I haven't really used it since so I don't think that's worth it.

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Zandvliet said:
50 minutes ago, Thanatopsis said:

 

I got that lens only for my safari trip, I haven't really used it since so I don't think that's worth it.

Then honestly your probably fine on lenses if you dont use the 55-200mm unless your going to grab an 75  through 85mm lens.

 

If your not using a 55mm-200mm for anything including Portraiture then your probably fine with the range of lenses you have and its just looking to see if there is faster glass in your price range.  If there isn't faster glass then congrats you don't need to spend more money or you have to save up more more cash for the next tier up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, new to the forum :) I  am a portrait photographer  based in Lyon.

 

I agree with t he  others on the 50 / 1.8  I used only this lens for a couple of years. For street is  a  good lens too, and is  small (you can find 2nd hand for 50$). For landscape not sure is working ok as the field of view is  a bit narrow but it depends the kind of landscapes you0 do. 

 

The 85 is a very good lens also  but is more difficult to use, in  portraits the  depth  of field will be  really small.

 

Just  a comment on proportion: is not the lens that make  people fatter or disproportioned, but is the distance. The point is that with  wide angle you need to get close to the subject, and this will create deformation due to the structure of the lens, on the other side with  zooms you will need to get far,  and everything will compress. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, aspnet said:

Hi, new to the forum :) I  am a portrait photographer  based in Lyon.

 

I agree with t he  others on the 50 / 1.8  I used only this lens for a couple of years. For street is  a  good lens too, and is  small (you can find 2nd hand for 50$). For landscape not sure is working ok as the field of view is  a bit narrow but it depends the kind of landscapes you0 do. 

 

The 85 is a very good lens also  but is more difficult to use, in  portraits the  depth  of field will be  really small.

 

Just  a comment on proportion: is not the lens that make  people fatter or disproportioned, but is the distance. The point is that with  wide angle you need to get close to the subject, and this will create deformation due to the structure of the lens, on the other side with  zooms you will need to get far,  and everything will compress. 

 

Thanks for the info!

"To the wise, life is a problem; to the fool, a solution" (Marcus Aurelius)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×