Open

by damned truths

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Take the 2-minute tour ×
Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a 1100D and I want a general purpose lens, but by searching this kind of lenses, I realized that I could sell my 1100D with my 18-55mm and buy the kit 550D + 18-135mm. So I basically have two options here:

  1. Keep my 1100D and buy the Tamron 18-270mm or
  2. Buy a 550D with Canon 18-135mm.

I think 550D is better than 1100D, but I also think 18-270mm is way better than 18-135mm.

OBS: I don't care much about the 135mm-270mm range, I prefer a sharper and faster lens.

EDIT

Which option should I go for? I mean, option 1 is like: "don't care about the camera, it's not a big deal change the 1100D for 550D, it's better have a better lens" and option 2 is like: "the 550D worth the money spent because it's a better camera and 18-135mm is great for your needs"

share|improve this question

3 Answers 3

Does the 550D do something you need or want that the 1100D doesn't do? There's no point in an upgrade that doesn't give you something you want - the question isn't is the 550D better, the question is if it's better for you.

By the way, I have the 550D and the 18-135 and I love them.

share|improve this answer

If you have to choose between better lens with worse body or better body with worse lens, I'd suggest to go with better lens because the lens will serve your for much longer than the body. After some years, you will be upgrading the body anyway. There was recently a question about such cases in general.

From your your question, I don't read any other reason for changing the camera other than "I can do that". If you don't feel like you actually need anything from the 550D, why pay for it? Instead, think how you could use your resources so they will make a change to your pictures.

share|improve this answer
    
That may just be a typo! –  khedron Oct 3 '11 at 14:45
    
Indeed was. Sorry for that. –  Luiz Fernando Oct 3 '11 at 15:29
    
Ok, removed the part about Tamrom. –  Imre Oct 3 '11 at 20:00

Statistics wise the Tamron outperforms the Canon according to DxOMark, but not by much, but if you don't care about the 135-270 then you might as well get something with a smaller zoom range, you should in theory have a faster aperture at more of the range, and more sharpness as well. Big zoom ranges come with trade-off's, and that's generally the speed and the sharpness.

share|improve this answer
    
Maximum apertures are shown in reviews of Bob Atkins (Tamron 18-270 and Canon 18-135, and seem to be neck-to-neck, so no advantage for 18-135 here. It seems like in this case, the trade-off for range comes in price. –  Imre Oct 3 '11 at 20:26
    
Ah I meant going for a smaller zoom lens, like an 24-70 or similar. It just depends if you want one lens to just leave on, or want a really fast aperture. –  Nicholas Smith Oct 4 '11 at 8:22

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.