[CRE8IVEDESTRUCTION]

Originally Posted by edmontonenthusiast

18-55 and 55-250 for Canon is what I recommend (same for Nikon, except it's 55-200 for Nikon). You'll probably eventually want something wider than 18mm though. The Tokina 11-16 is good, and I believe they make it for Canon too (why wouldn't they?).

You're going to love the wide angle of 20mm and less for architecture shots. Most photos it seems of buildings are wide angle. Why are they good? Well, they get to include the entire building (especially tall ones) into one shot up close. This up closeness and including the whole building forms wide angle which gives a nice artistic warp and curve to things (this is dramatified with a fisheye).

But a tele (like the 55-250) has it's charms. Like in dramatic views (where wide angle can also be nice) you can get close in on details of mountains, maybe a river, different buildings close together in a skyline, etc. It's also great for doing candid street photography of people on the street and perfect for getting little urban details like repetition of windows, contrast of facades, textures like wood or concrete or grass, and it's great for getting shallow depth of field (where the thing that you are focusing most on is the only thing actually in focus...be it a face, nose, tiny slice of sidewalk, one lampost of 10 in repeating pattern, etc.).

Thanks Edmontonenthusiast for your recommendation! :} So I bought the camera a few weeks back and I've been loving it a lot. Now there are two telephoto lenses that I'm considering. One is the 55-250mm you mentioned for $300, and the other lens is a 70-300mm lens for $650. The only lens that I have at the moment is the 18-55mm. If I get the 70-300mm will I be missing out a lot on the 55-70mm gap? Will it even make a big difference?