You know that thread, where someone asks what lens to buy next...

Question

This is one of those threads.
Some of you are aware of my photography journey from my last few posts.
At this point, my wife's photography needs are satisfied with the new SL1 and 18-55mm STM lens. It is a massive improvement over the older XTi w/ 17-40 4L. This also involved adding new manual speedlites.
As a result of this, the next lens will be more for me than my wife's business needs.
Originally, the next lens was to be a 60mm macro, but I have been having good enough results for now using close-up diopter with the kit lens at 55mm.
My goals are:
- A lens that "replaces" the 18-55mm for me so that my wife can use that lens full time without me needing to borrow it so often.
- An inexpensive lens with a good zoom range to experiment with before buying more expensive primes or L.
Already have these other lenses:
- (as already mentioned) the 18-55mm STM lens that my wife uses with SL1
- the original 18-55mm that came with the original EOS Digital Rebel (sometimes shows errors on the Xti when taking shots rapidly)
- 17-40mm EF 4L
I will probably use the old XTi some of the time and borrow the SL1 when she isn't doing business, etc. At least until I break down and buy my own dedicated camera.
I was thinking of either
- 18-135mm STM (total replacement for all the kit lenses for me, no need to use the old 18-55 or ever borrow my wife's lens)
- 55-250mm STM (can use the 17-40 or my older 18-55 for wide angle)
I am leaning towards the 55-250mm for two reasons:
- I already have several lenses with wider angles to choose from when those situations arise.
- the 55-250mm is pretty cheap at $300ish
Thoughts?

Answer 1

If you can find a "real" camera store, you might want to try out a 55-250mm.  
I had the non-STM version of that lens was never very happy with it.  The STM gets much better reviews and image-quality for the price is supposed to be very good (again... I have not personally tried the STM version.)
Avoid the 75-300mm USM -- that lens has the reputation for being one of the most marginal lenses (both in build quality and image quality) in the line-up.
The 70-300mm USM is MUCH MUCH better (but I think the retail price on that lens is closer to $650 -- so you'd expect it to be better, and it is.)
I will say that I gave away my 55-250 to a relative (again, not the STM version) for two reaons.  #1 I was not thrilled with the image quality and, #2 I found myself using the 55-250mm range FAR less often than I would have imagined. 
Oddly, I own the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (the original -- I bought my copy new, but before Canon introduced the II generation of that lens.)  I use that lens quite often.  But I'm not using it to shoot subjects at a distance, I'm using it because it has a fantastic look.  I'll take a portrait that I could have taken with a shorter lens, but the image looks much better when I use the 70-200 f/2.8 (although I'm usually using it nearer to f/4) and stand farther away to get approximately the same frame.  The compression and quality of the out-of-focus background has a great look to it.  So I could use it as a sports lens (and a lot of people do), but I actually tend to use more like a portrait lens.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da