| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/16/2005 02:27:53 PM · #1 |
| I would like to buy a relatively cheap, all-purpose Canon lens. I've read several reviews about the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM. They all have good things to say. Although I was curious if there is a better all purpose lens with a better zoom that still falls into the f2.8 minimum aperature. I don't really want to spend more than $400. Thanks. |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 02:30:21 PM · #2 |
You might want to look at this thread talking about the 35mm/2.
|
|
|
|
06/16/2005 02:58:18 PM · #3 |
| Are you looking only primes? If not the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 ex are very good. Although it costs a bit more than $400. |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 03:18:21 PM · #4 |
| I'm not necessarily looking for primes. I'm kind of new to photography so I'm not sure about all of the technical characteristics of each lens. I do a lot of night shooting (or I would LIKE to) and I've heard a lower f number...like f1.8, f2.8, etc. is good to have. I want a good all purpose lens that has a zoom range of 28-50 or 28-70 with f2.8, etc. I don't want a piece of garbage lens though...I suppose I could pay up to $500, if I knew I was getting something good. |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 03:25:39 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 03:55:49 PM · #6 |
Being somewhat new myself, I have dropped quite a bit on several lenses in hopes of finding the best lens for the money. I bought a 50mm f/1.4 and it does give me some latitude when shooting in low light. However, you should think about what you want to shoot or what interests you. I recommend a good tripod no matter what you like to shoot and start using it to compensate for low light and save your money for faster lenses. You would probably get a better bang for your buck by getting one of the suggested wide angle zoom lenses from Tamron or Sigma. I have come to accept the fact that any lense worth having is going to run 350-500 US and any lens that a pro is using is going to be over 700-2500US. My latest purchase was a used 80-200mm f/2.8 (2.8 through the entire focal length)for 450US (normally around 800-1100 new). Almost any variable aperture lens will fall off the widest aperture (smallest number) as soon as you increase the focal length. I could ramble on but the bottom line is you get what you pay for. Remember that a low aperture causes a shallow depth of field and this has made me re-evaluate how I shoot. Here are some of my favorites to make your head explode.
Good Luck
Hempster
//photographic.com/lenstips/telephototips/122/
//www.sweeting.org/mark/lenses/nikon.php
//www.outsight.com/hyperfocal.html#dof
//www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/fototech/apershutter/index.htm |
|
|
|
06/16/2005 04:01:02 PM · #7 |
im not an expert at lenses but i think the 50mm f/1.8 is just as good optically as the 50mm f/1.4 and a lot cheaper, got my a few days ago for $75 dollars plus shipping. Then theres the tamron 28-75 f/2.8, its supposed to be just as good as the 50 f/1.8 at 50mm plus it has zoom. I sells for under $400 although its sold out everywhere last i looked.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/25/2025 10:21:03 AM EDT.
