which lens are best buy for canon 450D ?

soon i am going to buy new canon 450D camera, but i am not going to buy with kit lens like 18-55 because lots of

people told me its not worth to have that lens so instead of that lens i have figure out 4 lenses for my use and i also

considered all four in my budget also. kindly guide me which two lens are best buy for me. my requirement is

landscape, wildlife and bird photography some macro also.

i am going to buy any 2.

options are

CANON 28-105 : F.4/5.6, CANON 50 MM : F 1.8, CANON 55-250 IS F:4/5.6, SIGMA 70-300 APO F.4/5.6,

CANON 75-300 F.4/5.6

You see me a bit confused ...

you say you're not going to buy the EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS ... but instead take any two of your list ... hmmm

three of them are telezooms ... the range is completely different from the 18-55 ... how will they help you if you need something in the 18-55 (standard) range?

one of them is a prime (low price, but optically very decent quality) ... but already acts like a small tele on the 450D ... and will also not help you overly much in everyday use. (Nevertheless I find this lens highly recommended).

The last is a standard zoom from filmdays ... not a bad lens ... it just will not give you any wideangle on the 450D ... it will act like a normal-to-tele zoom lens.

If you count landscape to your priorities you need something wide ... I don't see anything covering that in your list. And for wildlife and birds ... the 300mm from the telezooms are just the minimum (400mm or 500mm would be better). I also don't see any macro coverage.

My advice ... rethink your list. Rather than taking any 2 of this list, I would go with the kitlens and save the money until you can more exact specify what you want.

"my requirement is landscape, wildlife and bird photography some macro also. "

Wow! That is a tall order, and you are in for a shock. Wildlife and bird photography is a very difficult thing to do well, and needs long, fast glass. Landscape is often wide angle and needs short, not so fast lenses. Two very different requirements.

Long, fast glass is very expensive. I would not consider any of the lenses you listed as good for wildlife and bird photography. You will get some pictures, but I suspect they will not live up to the images you have in your head from looking at bird and wildlife photography in magazines and on the web. You should spend some time looking at images that you want to be able to do, and find out what equipment is used to get them. It will be very expensive, I bet.

None of the lenses you listed are wide enough to fit my idea of a good landscape lens. Canon's 17-55 IS would be my first choice for the 450. Tamron makes a good version of the same lens without IS for considerably less.

Macro is another topic altogether and needs a good macro lens to be done well. None of the lenses you have listed are good macro lenses.

There is nothing in your list that will be even remotely a wide angle lens when used with the small sensor of a 450D. I could recommend the Canon 18-55 IS lens (better than the non-IS kit lens), and quite a good lens for the money. At least it would give you a true wide to telephoto range, coupled with Image Stabilization.

The 28-105 f/4-5.6 is one of Canon's worst lenses. Don't buy it. The 28-105 f.3.5-4.5 is much better in all respects, but I'm still not sure I would recommend a lens of that length for a small frame DSLR. The 18-55 IS lens would be a better choice for most subjects and most photographers.

The 50mm f/1.8 is a cheap lens that has good optics and works well as a short telephoto or portrait lens. But if you are looking for a fast normal lens, it's too long. You would be better off with a 35mm f/2. It's more money, but it is a better lens, and the focal length is better suited to a small frame digital camera.

The 55-250 IS is a good lens for the money, but the Canon 70-300 IS lens is better. Too bad it costs so much more. The Sigma 70-300 APO is optically fairly good, but lacking IS, makes it a far less usable lens without packing a tripod with you, and it isn't any better than the 55-250 IS optically. All the Canon 75-300's (there are several versions of them) are all only fair optically, and not as good as any of the other choices. It is cheap though. For a budget choice, the 55-250 IS would be my choice. I would not get a telephoto lens that does not have IS. It's too important with these longer lenses.

If I was restricted to only two of the ones you listed, they would have to be the 18-55 IS (which you said you would not get) and the 55-250 IS.

None of the four lenses listed will be very suitable for landscape photography: none is wide enough.

28mm is barely a normal Field of View on a 450D, and you list ``Landscape`` as your first shooting priority.

But choosing from your list only, I would choose the CANON 28-105 : F.4/5.6, because it is the widest.

Next is to choose a mate for it, and I would go for the CANON 55-250 IS, because it has range to 250mm and it has IS.

***

I think you would be disappointed with the CANON 75-300 F.4/5.6: especially the image quality at the telephoto end, and the fact it does not have IS.

I think you would be happy with the 50F1.8, but it does not serve many of your listed purposes.

I have not used the Sigma lens, I make no comment on it.

***

Most importantly: I think you should carefully analyse the credentials and first hand experience of those who have told you not to get the kit lens. I consider it especially good value for money for any beginner and especially for landscape work:

E.G. FYI:

http://www.photo.net/photo/7302856

http://www.photo.net/photo/7276581

http://www.photo.net/photo/7302875

WW

To be crystal clear, when I wrote:

> But choosing from your list only, I would choose the CANON 28-105 : F.4/5.6, because it is the widest <

I was not suggesting this is the best lens for you to buy. I would not buy this lens.

It does not have very good IQ.

I was keeping strictly to the question and taking it from your list, and choosing it because it is the widest FL option you gave me.

I did not mention the kit lens as a choice, because you did not give me that option either.

But, after answering the question, I did strongly recommend you reconsider previous advice about the kit lens, and review your lens list.

***

Jim wrote:

``If I was restricted to only two of the ones you listed, they would have to be the 18-55 IS (which you said you would not get) and the 55-250 IS.``

I agree 100% with this comment. And I know, from first hand experience that this combination affords very good value for money and allows a great scope for good images and a good learning tool for beginners.

At the time of writing my first comments, I could not see Jim`s (or any other) comments, because of the time delay in posting.

***

BTW, the three images I linked to were taken with the 18 to 55 kit lens (the first one, which is non IS and supposedly inferior to the current 18 to 55 IS version).

The three images are all taken Hand Held, though the City Nightscape has the camera cradled tightly against a wall and railing, for support and stability.

WW

CANON 28-105 : F.4/5.6 - Not very useful range on crop sensor camera, no IS, image quality nothing special.

CANON 50 MM : F 1.8 - Very useful cheap short tele. Good in low light and for shallow depth of field.

CANON 55-250 IS F:4/5.6 - Price / performance winner.

SIGMA 70-300 APO F.4/5.6, CANON 75-300 F.4/5.6 - Cheap and you can see it, no IS. Don't bother, go with the 22-250 IS.

...and take the 18-55 **IS** kit lens. For landscape buy a tripod, stop down to f8 and shoot.