Lens Kit Set : One (EF-S18-135) or Two (EF-S18-55mm & EF-S 55-250mm)

[StarsShooter]

I had tha same dilemma as you are when I bought my 60D. I've finished buying 18-55 IS + 55-250. I've changed my 18-55 to 15-85 (much more expensive lens) after 4 months. Not because the image quality was that bad but mostly of it's slow AF (15-85 is USM, much faster) and the extra range on both ends it gave me. The 55-250 in my opinion is an amazing lens for it's price. Though I use it much less since I have the 15-85, I still enjoy it a lot when I need sharp photos with great colors from long distance (on crop like 650D it will be 88-400mm). It is also great for portrets when you take them from a bit further away, gives very nice bokeh. 

Thank you so much for sharing!!! I'm gonna keep that in mind

[StarsShooter]

For serious portrait work, get primes and not because of image quality. They help you to get better because they are harder to use. You have to take time to get your photos and that makes them much better. With fast lenses as the primes suggested below you have the means to get your background nice and blurry, but don´t overdo it. Just because you can doesn´t mean you must or even should.

Skip all kit lenses or go for the 18-55 only since it´s almost free and might be nice at patries where you get beer all over your gear...

get the 50/1.4 from either canon or sigma, the 30 /1.4 sigma or the 28 /1.8 from canon (siggy if you want to stay on a aps-c body forever or canon if you think you want to move to full frame sometime in the future). The 85 /1.8 is mentioned by others here and it is a great choise, or if you want even more reach go for the 100 /2.

For portrtaits, all you need is a few primes. And some flashes. And most of all people skills. Zooms are great for when you don´t have time to interact with your subject, but even in a stressfull situation you usually have time to switch lenses if you interact with the person you are photographing, wich is a must for good portraiture. I only worry about my gear when looking online and when thinking about it. When I photograph, I never worry. I just use what I have and make the best of it, and usually I get pictures. There is no need at all to completely cover 18-250 mm. Those of you who have all those mm of range, have you ever taken a photo @173mm?
A zoom is also extremely usefull when you can not change lenses because of external interfearance like snow, sand, dust or rain.

Oh, and a boring focal length is 28 mm both on crop and FF. Also on FF 50 mm is also boring, but I have to agree that 28mm is the most boring focal length. That is actually a good thing because when you make an excelent portrait using that focal lenght, it´s not because you used some exotic gear but because you are a good photographer. That is a great challenge and we should start a group named portraits captured @50mm @ f/11 on FF or 28 mm f/11 on crop.

Good luck with your choise.

Good luck!

(and all this being said, I have lots of lenses by now, not to cover all focal lengths but to cover the different things I am shooting. So 28mm is covered in 3 different lenses, 35 mm in 3, 85 mm in 3, 135 in 2.... but I usually don´t bring all lenses on a shoot. It all depends on the job. For agriculture, i use mostly zooms because of the dust. For portraits I use mostly primes, even if the subject is a cow.)

Thank you so much for sharing! I have all the prime lenses you've mentioned bookmarked too Although the 18-55's pretty good, but since its coming along with the 55-250 (which I doubt I will even use it), I might go for the 18-135. But primes are a MUST for me in the future!!! All priorities for it. Once again, thank you so much!!!!

[StarsShooter]

I think the 18-135 is the better lens. It's the new version that has the STM that allows for silent auto focusing during video. Also it covers a nice range without having to change lens. As a newbie its better to use one lens so you get used to it and learn. Then as u get better upgrade or buy new leses. The 18-55 and that other plastic thing are pure garbage. Most kit lenses for aps-c cameras are!

I wouldn't say the 18-55 is garbage. It's quite sharp and has IS, obviously a bit slow, but good for the price.

Here's one I took with that lens:

Thank you so much for your kind reply! That shot looks absolutely gorgeous, and now I'm torn again between the two sets 

Just to clarify, I'm not saying the 18-55 is the equal of the 17-55, far from it. But as somebody else mentioned, it almost comes free with the camera, and it's a reliable, sharp lens for most situations. I sometimes use a 550D plus this lens as my spare body + lens set for weddings. I tend to shoot with it wide open and it's plenty sharp that way, so the amount of aperture blades isn't really a factor for me at least.

Got it, I'll keep that in mind! Thank you!!!

[StarsShooter]

Of the 2 I'd get the 18-135 especially if its the new STM version. Otherwise it's a toss up, can't go wrong with either as a starter. If funds allow maybe consider body only and either the efs 17-55 f2.8 or the efs 15-85.

Thank you for your advice!!!!!!!!

[dhofmann]

15-85 + 70-200mm f/4.0L IS. Each are very sharp across its entire zoom range.

[aroo]

I've used all 3 of these lenses a lot over the past few years. The 18-135mm range is extremely versatile and useful. That's the one I'd recommend as your first lens. You should also get a 50mm f/1.8 as soon as possible (it's so cheap and sharp, with a wide max aperture!) Then the 55-250mm later, if you often find yourself wanting to zoom in closer.

[RLPhoto]

Get the 18-135mm because its not the 18-55mm. 

[verysimplejason]

15-85 + 70-200mm f/4.0L IS. Each are very sharp across its entire zoom range.

or better yet, 17-40 + 70-200.   If he wants to go FF after sometime, he doesn't have to sell any lens.

[AmbientLight]

or better yet, 17-40 + 70-200.   If he wants to go FF after sometime, he doesn't have to sell any lens.

+1 This is good advice. It always helps to think forward a couple of years or so. Since entry level full-frame is now a distinct market segment, there should be more like that coming about in years to come and these cameras are bound to become more interesting, so eventually you might end up going full-frame.

[Greg_M]

If you would like to do some lens comparisons, this site has some real definitive testing results. I have 3 lenses pulled up, but you can discard those and/or add more.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/164/%28lens2%29/220/%28lens3%29/598/%28brand1%29/Canon/%28camera1%29/619/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28camera2%29/619/%28brand3%29/Canon/%28camera3%29/0

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Thank you so much for your kind advice!!!! I'm really opting for the 18-135mm now, being a newbie and all I believe it'll be a good start. Once again, thank you!!!

Good Choice.  You might also want one low light lens, 50mm f/1.8 is inexpensive and in a dark place, you will be happy to have it.  Just keep it in a padded pouch when not using it, its fairly easy to damage if banged around.

[verysimplejason]

If you have that extra money, you may want to get the 55-250mm also.  It is very useful because of its added reach.

[JohanCruyff]

So the dilemma : I'm torn between the 18-135 set or the 18-55 & 55-250 set...
I'm a total newb in DSLRs, and I was just wondering which set should I be getting???

 
In order to save precious storage, let me recycle this thread with a similar, but different, question.
PREAMBLE
Two days ago I sold my venerable 5D classic, bought (used) four years ago.
Just before selling (for obsolescence, possible future lack of spare parts etc.), I realized that I took 10,000 pictures in 2011-2012 and just 5,000 in 2013-2014.
I couldn't believe it: truth is that when my EOS M arrived, I started to take it with me more often than the 5D. What a lazy pervert have I become!
Now I can't decide whether to replace my 5Dc with a 6D (high IQ, slow performance in terms of AF points and FPS) or with a 70D (worse IQ, better performance). They weight more or less the same.
My real target would be a 6D Mark II, which I expect to be more or less a full frame version of the 70D... so a third option could be to skip both the 70D and the 6D, and wait for the 6D2.
Fourth option: sell the M stuff and buy a 70D and a 6D. In this case my wife could kill me, you all know how women are.    And you guys don't want me to stop participating to this excellent forum, do you?

So, let's go back to the topic.
MY QUESTION:
If I realize I can't wait => give in to consumerism => and buy a 70D,
considering that I already own an EF-S 55-250 IS STM,
would it make sense to buy an EF-S 18-135 STM, or a cheaper and lighter EF-S 18-55 STM would be enough or better, coupled with the 55-250?
I don't see myself using my 17-40 F/4 or my 24-105 F/4 IS on a crop body.
[A corollary could be: if I prove to be such a lazy amateur photographer, maybe I can survive with just an APS-C body (I'm not so sure, though): this event could significantly change my future purchase plans (or roadmap, as they say)].