| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/05/2006 03:59:10 PM · #1 |
First of all, Hi all!
My first post here =) I was chocked by the amazing pictures you guys have posted here and understand that theres loads of knowlage here.
My name is Bass and im from sweden so please have understanding for my bad english ^^
Anyway, im getting a kid anyday/week now and i decided to take the step into the DSLR world. Getting kind of stressed since i need to make the buy and im still confused and cant maky my shoice.
This is what i have come up with so far:
Canon 350D
I was thinking about 20D but realized i cant afford it
Sigma EX 18-50/2,8 DC
(Need a lowlight lens to use at home taking pics of my newborn. I also wish to photo without flash since i dont want to hurt hes/her eyes right away =)
Canon EF 50/1,8 II DC
Same as above but more of a portrait lense
Canon EF 70-300 IS USM (new version)
I flyfish alot and i am alot in the nature. I wanted i lense that i can use without tripod. Maybee shoot one or two birds and what ever nature brings. So Handheld, decent range, not to expensive and IS made me pick this one.
What do you guys think of this?
Any of these i should change vs anything else?
This is kinda expensive in sweden so with this kit i have maxed out my budget to the last penny =)
I would LOVE your advice here
//Bass
|
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:03:30 PM · #2 |
| All very good choices. That's an excellent set to get you started. |
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:03:51 PM · #3 |
Seems like a good selection of lenses and reasons for them.
I have the sigam 18-50 2.8. Nice lens, a bit soft below 3.5. Good indoor lens beacuse of the wide aperture, 18mm wide end. Very sharp above f4.5 or so. YOu might have a look at the new sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5. More range, only marginally slower, and similar price (chraper i think). It is not EX glass and I have not read a review but you might want to have a look.
50 1.8. Yes.
I had the sigma 70-300 APO. Nice lens, but without IS handholding at the 250-300 range required 1/600 to 1/800 minumum shutter speed. So if the canon IS lens is sharp above 200mm (the older ones were not) then it may be a good choice. Does it do macro?
You have no macro lenses there...you may not care though.
Many people love the tamron 18-75 2.8, but beleive me, 28 is NOT wide enough if it is your widest lens.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:07:47 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
Seems like a good selection of lenses and reasons for them.
I have the sigam 18-50 2.8. Nice lens, a bit soft below 3.5. Good indoor lens beacuse of the wide aperture, 18mm wide end. Very sharp above f4.5 or so. YOu might have a look at the new sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5. More range, only marginally slower, and similar price (chraper i think). It is not EX glass and I have not read a review but you might want to have a look.
50 1.8. Yes.
I had the sigma 70-300 APO. Nice lens, but without IS handholding at the 250-300 range required 1/600 to 1/800 minumum shutter speed. So if the canon IS lens is sharp above 200mm (the older ones were not) then it may be a good choice. Does it do macro?
You have no macro lenses there...you may not care though.
Many people love the tamron 18-75 2.8, but beleive me, 28 is NOT wide enough if it is your widest lens. |
Hi and thanx for feedback.
The 70-300IS has no macro.. i LOVE shooting macro (with my p&s camera lol) And i know i would love doing it on this camera. But the money is gone when i bought these. That will be a later question i think =/
BTW you guys dont think its unnessesary to have both the Sigma and the 50/1,8 since they both cover 50mm?
Message edited by author 2006-03-05 16:09:04. |
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:12:52 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Bassel:
BTW you guys dont think its unnessesary to have both the Sigma and the 50/1,8 since they both cover 50mm? |
No, because the 50 f/1.8 will be sharper right from f/1.8 and a heck of a lot sharper at f/2.8-5.6 than the Sigma and probably also have better contrast.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:14:32 PM · #6 |
1.8 is actually quite a bit faster than 2.8. Great indoor lens.
And, as stated above, the lens is really sharp, even wide open which is where you'll probably use it most of the time. |
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:15:11 PM · #7 |
| You might want to check out the new tamron 17-50mm 2.8. Might compare to the 28-75mm 2.8. |
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:17:34 PM · #8 |
I'd skip the 50mm unless you want or need a wide aperature of f1.8.
Tamron is making a 17-50 f2.8 as well. I don't know if it's cheaper than the Sigma's 18-50 though. A f2.8 18-50 is a good idea.
The Canon 70-300 IS is another nice lens, there however is s design flaw. If you hold the camera in the verticle format for a portrait, the lens barrel may move if zoomed out past 200, causing lens misalignement of a soft image. This varies from lens to lens, so definately check to make sure your lens does not have it.
Good luck
|
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:18:19 PM · #9 |
Firstly congrats... Then...
Good choice for what you are looking to do. You may also want to look at getting a flash for fill in (350 has a built one, but in low light may pick up red eye problems), and esp for bounce lighting when taking Photographs of the new addition to the household. Speedlite 430EX will do nicely, not as cool as the 580, but really good value.
 |
|
|
|
03/05/2006 04:26:01 PM · #10 |
Thanx! Getting a baby is big!.. really big =D
Ok feeling safer and safer with the way i picked lenses. Been reading reviews and watching photos for like 7 hours a day the whole week lol.
70-300IS
Yeah i heard about that problem. Was thinking that i should do alot of testing with the lens and make sure that its a good copy, othervise just send back and ask for a new one.
I dont know how to test focus (back or front focus problem) but i guess ill learn and can do it on the lenses too.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
This is looking really nice! But the lens wont hit the stores here in sweden untill late Maj. Too late for me =/
|
|
|
|
03/05/2006 05:58:53 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Bassel:
Thanx! Getting a baby is big!.. really big =D
I dont know how to test focus (back or front focus problem) but i guess ill learn and can do it on the lenses too.
|
Congratulations! Yes, big! You can't imagine until you've been there! :-)
As far as focus test, this link should help you. Even though it is written around a Nikon, the same procedure will work for any camera.
//www.focustestchart.com/chart.html
|
|
|
|
03/06/2006 09:12:29 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Kaizer:
Firstly congrats... Then...
Good choice for what you are looking to do. You may also want to look at getting a flash for fill in (350 has a built one, but in low light may pick up red eye problems), and esp for bounce lighting when taking Photographs of the new addition to the household. Speedlite 430EX will do nicely, not as cool as the 580, but really good value.
|
Good choice of lenses, I think you'll use the 50/1.8 more than the others in the hospital (when the rooms are dim...)
The 430EX or 580EX (and most other external flashes) let you point the flash away from your subject. this allows you to use flash and not bother the baby as much, eliminates red-eye and if done right, eliminates shadows.
Another item that helps is a flash diffuser like a StoFen omnibounce or Garry Fong Lightsphere.
But if you've spent your budget, you can try using a white index card and somehow attaching it to the on-camera flash so that you bounce the light off the ceiling. That flash is a bit underpowered for bounce use, but it may be enough to fill in with room lighting. |
|
|
|
03/06/2006 09:33:02 AM · #13 |
Thinking ahead..get a canon 100 2.8 for macro work. Altenrative sigma has their 105 and tamron their 90, and tokina has a nice 100ish lens out now. Not much price difference between them, but i have used the canon 100 and it is sweet.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2006 09:43:08 AM · #14 |
Just a note to correct above the Tamron 18-75 f/2.8 is actually the 28-75 2.8.
My personal recommendation would be the 18-55 kit lens plus the 50mm 1.8.
I would then recommend the 70-200 or 80-200 (2nd hand) f/2.8L and a 1.4x Tele-converter with the money saved. Good solid investment there. Not really a big deal for that mix as I'm sure the 70-300 IS is also a great choice here.
I feel that the kit lens will be plenty sharp enough for baby portraits. You don't need razor sharp for that anyhow. If you do, use the 50mm 1.8 prime. Heck, if it was me, I'd probably take almost all of my pictures of the baby with the 50mm.
I'm personally looking at a similar mix and I will probably be getting the 28-75mm Tamron as a walk-around or standard use lens and use the 18-55 for anything wider until I get the money (and desire) for the 10-22.
As far as macro is concerned, you could experiment with the reverse mount for the 50mm (and a rear element filter adaptor) to get some seriously decent macro stuff, or combining it with the 28-75 (which already comes with a 1:2 macro mode).
Reverse mounting the 50mm 1.8 can allow some really decent levels of magnification. The mount is just a little over 10 dollars.
If you do choose the 70-300 IS and save money on your telephoto end, you could end up with a 100mm prime lens like Prof Fate suggested (I like the Canon one with IF myself, but they're all really good) and it can also accept a 50mm reverse mount.
As far as a flash is concerned, another great choice is the Sigma 500 which is like half the price of a 580, and has everything but the slave control.
Message edited by author 2006-03-06 09:44:11. |
|
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: 07/20/2025 08:38:05 AM EDT.
