# Canon 60D, my first SLR question



## wer2next (Oct 12, 2011)

Well i finally decided on my first SLR, the Canon 60D. I posted a while back on buying a camera but due to a few unforeseen expenses i had put the camera on hold. 

My question is which should i get? Body only, body w/ 18-135, or body w/ 18-200. I am tempted to go with the 18-200, but is this lens worth the extra cost? 

Canon EOS 60D DSLR Camera Kit with Canon EF-S 4460B016 B&H Photo

What will i be doing with the camera? I wanted it for soccer games, under the lights outdoor, indoor soccer, and spring will be outdoor soccer, So fast action mostly. 

My knowledge of lenses is minimal at best, If i were to get the body only, what lens would i need to go with the body? My budget is about 1500, i might be able to go to 2000 if i had too. 

Thank you, Carlos


----------



## Robin Usagani (Oct 12, 2011)

Get 60D with 24-105 f/4L .  Perfect all around lens.


----------



## KmH (Oct 12, 2011)

No, the 18-200 mm is not worth the extra cost from an overall image quality viewpoint.

Yes, the 18-200 mm is worth the extra cost from a convenience, all-in-one, jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none viewpoint.


----------



## shootermcgavin (Oct 12, 2011)

I personally would get a good lens f2.8 or lower and slowly build up, instead of buying the same lens twice if you really get into what you're doing.


----------



## flagrl (Oct 12, 2011)

been looking at reviews for 60d and it looks great thank you. will look into some more


----------



## jaomul (Oct 12, 2011)

I cant comment on the price but the 18-135mm would be nice to start with, give you plenty of range and all in all it gets good reviews for what it is. If i came across the lens and body for a good deal I would go for it. It will teach you what lenses you need going forward and would always be good as a walk around lens.


----------



## wer2next (Oct 12, 2011)

Thank you all for the comments. 




Schwettylens said:


> Get 60D with 24-105 f/4L . Perfect all around lens.



I checked out that lens, and it looks amazing, that might be the one i go with. I also came across this one Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM Lens 2578A002 B&H Photo Video If you or anyone else has any thoughts on it please let me know. Is it over kill for shooting soccer games, or not enough? 



KmH said:


> No, the 18-200 mm is not worth the extra cost from an overall image quality viewpoint.
> 
> Yes, the 18-200 mm is worth the extra cost from a convenience, all-in-one, jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none viewpoint.



I will keep that in mind



shootermcgavin said:


> I personally would get a good lens f2.8 or lower and slowly build up, instead of buying the same lens twice if you really get into what you're doing.



Very good point. Any thoughts on the lens above (70-200)?



flagrl said:


> been looking at reviews for 60d and it looks great thank you. will look into some more



Seemed like the right one for me. Price and quality all seem to be there. 



jaomul said:


> I cant comment on the price but the 18-135mm would be nice to start with, give you plenty of range and all in all it gets good reviews for what it is. If i came across the lens and body for a good deal I would go for it. It will teach you what lenses you need going forward and would always be good as a walk around lens.



I may go with a stock lens. Is there any place you recommend buying the camera?

I might go with these two, If i can get feedback on this lens. 

://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732048-REG/Canon_4460B004_EOS_60D_DSLR_Camera.html

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/183198-GREY/Canon_2578A002_EF_70_200mm_f_4L_USM.html

or would that lens be strictly for bright light conditions? No under the lights or indoor soccer?


----------

