| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/16/2007 04:46:02 PM · #1 |
hi all..
i am currently using a tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 as a main lens, it works ok outdoors but indoors the results are very soft & contrast is bad( i already expected that from a 45 $ lens )but it came with my kit..
anyway am thinking of getting a 3rd lens ( sharp lens ) but am on a tight budget 400-550 $ , any suggestions are welcome |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:48:34 PM · #2 |
| The best bang for your buck is a 50mm f/1.8. Cheap, fast and sharp. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:52:35 PM · #3 |
From your budget, L series lenses are out of the question. If ever you can get L series, do it.
I would probably recommend the Canon primes. Most fit that budget. I recently bought an 85mm 1.8 USM for $350ish. Its pretty amazing.
I would stay clear of Sigmas and other 3rd party lenses. Some will disagree, but I have a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 that I got for $500ish. I would put a value of $250 on that lens. The f2.8 is practically unuseable. This lens is great at f8 or so, but what lens isn't? I have a Canon 50mm, 85mm prime that I would use over the Sigma unless absolutely necessary.
I also just bought a 70-200 f2.8L IS USM and its the greatest thing I have ever put on my camera. Don't even try one unless you plan to buy it because everything after using that is inferior. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:53:01 PM · #4 |
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or the 28-75 f2.8
Unless you want a prime. Then, just about anything Canon offers will blow the doors off what you have. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:54:52 PM · #5 |
Tamron 17-50 2.8 SP is one that I'm really wanting. Thier SP series is very sharp.
A 50mm is great, but might as well spend the money all in one shot that get 50mm coverage if you're on a budget.
The Canon 17-85 IS is supposed to be a good, sharp lens. Not as great for indoor with the higher f/ rating, but the IS will help a little with that. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:56:28 PM · #6 |
| As Spazmo said, can't forget the Tamron 28-75, which is a favorite lens of many a DPCer. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:56:46 PM · #7 |
Canon 70-200mm f/4L currently goes for about $540... If not that then the Tammy 28-75 is the best bet. Sharp at f/2.8 and only gets better from there on out. All yours for $350ish.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2007 04:59:04 PM · #8 |
| for sharpness id say the two sharpest in my bag have been mentioned the Tamron 28-75 xr-di with a constant f2.8 and the best lens for the buck ever the canon 50mm f1.8, the housing is plastic, but the glass is very good. |
|
|
|
07/16/2007 05:00:09 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by wavelength:
Tamron 17-50 2.8 SP is one that I'm really wanting. Thier SP series is very sharp. |
I have it and love it! I lucked into it - the kid at the camera store suggested it when I bought my D200 6 weeks ago.
Here's the DPC page showing various images taken with it.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2007 05:00:36 PM · #10 |
The 50mm 1.8 is the lens I test everything against in terms of sharpness. I have heard great things about the Tamron which is why I just ordered one :D.
Beyond those 2 options you might just be able to find the 17-40L at the very top end of your budget and if you're very lucky, but I'm not the greatest fan of the f4, or the price. When I was looking for a lens I was considering either the Tamron (which I bought), the Sigma 18-50 2.8, the Sigma 17-70mm macro or the 14-40mm L. I read the reviews on photozone, fred miranda and about 10 other sites comparing them and opted for the Tamron since I've heard nothing bad about it and the sharpness tests on photozone seem almost comparable to the 50mm 1.8, and for a zoom lens that's quite spectacular.
My vote goes with the Tamron and on ebay they're about $300-$350. There's the bigger version of the one I mentioned, i think its a 28-70mm 2.8, on this very site for $300. Check it out.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2007 05:08:23 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 or the 28-75 f2.8
Unless you want a prime. Then, just about anything Canon offers will blow the doors off what you have. |
Totally agree with Spaz.
I have the Tamron 17-50 2.8...luuuuuuuuuuv this lens, wicked sharp and fast. |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:20:58 PM · #12 |
| does anyone have a canon 24 1.4 and post any examples of a very sharp portrait |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:23:45 PM · #13 |
Dang - you OWN that lens Jeff...
|
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:29:58 PM · #14 |
The Canon 60mm EF-S Macro is super-sharp (as are most macros), compact, and well within your price range: approx $250 if you shop around. It's a very nice portrait length as well, and it's an f/2.8 lens so it's pretty good for low light. Everything in my Flowers Gallery was shot with this lens. They are almost all extreme closeups shot at f/2.8-5.6, so don't confuse the super-shallow DOF with lack of sharpness; look for the sharpness in the clear portions.
R.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:38:58 PM · #15 |
could you please tell me what you mean by sharp?
i am a bit confused.
i turned off all sharpness in my camera and sharpen images only after editing and resizing.
do you mean sharp for printing straight from a camera or is it some other lens quality i need to think more about?
i keep reading in reviews that the 85 mm 1.2 and 135mm 2.0 lenses are the sharpest canon has and can't understand what they mean.
thank you! |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:40:53 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by TLL061:
does anyone have a canon 24 1.4 and post any examples of a very sharp portrait |
24mm on your 5D is very wide to use as a portrait lens...Not the most flattering way of shooting portraits. |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:46:06 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by silverfoxx:
could you please tell me what you mean by sharp?
i am a bit confused.
i turned off all sharpness in my camera and sharpen images only after editing and resizing.
do you mean sharp for printing straight from a camera or is it some other lens quality i need to think more about?
i keep reading in reviews that the 85 mm 1.2 and 135mm 2.0 lenses are the sharpest canon has and can't understand what they mean.
thank you! |
"Sharpness" in a lens refers to its resolving power. Sharper lenses can resolve finer details. No amount of PP can bring true sharpness to unresolved, muddy details.
R.
|
|
|
|
07/23/2007 03:47:22 PM · #18 |
The meaning here is 'How sharp is the image straight from the lens without any sharpening or post processing'. A low quality lens will not have good sharpness to the image and sharpness is only obtained by post processing (in camera or photoshop). A high quality lens will have really good sharpness directly from the camera and does not require much manipulation. Therefore, the high quality lens will show more detail than a low quality lens since the high quality lens is actually able to 'see' the detail.
Originally posted by silverfoxx:
could you please tell me what you mean by sharp?
i am a bit confused.
i turned off all sharpness in my camera and sharpen images only after editing and resizing.
do you mean sharp for printing straight from a camera or is it some other lens quality i need to think more about?
i keep reading in reviews that the 85 mm 1.2 and 135mm 2.0 lenses are the sharpest canon has and can't understand what they mean.
thank you! |
Message edited by author 2007-07-23 15:48:10. |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 04:14:29 PM · #19 |
| everyone keeps mentioning the 17-50. there is agreat deal on one here |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 04:43:32 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by doctornick:
Originally posted by TLL061:
does anyone have a canon 24 1.4 and post any examples of a very sharp portrait |
24mm on your 5D is very wide to use as a portrait lens...Not the most flattering way of shooting portraits. |
dr your right, I am looking for a wider prime, I already have a 50 1.4 I thought I could get something a little wider
Message edited by author 2007-07-23 16:43:58. |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 04:53:42 PM · #21 |
i would say. the 100 mm 2.8 macro. this lens is very sharp wide open and very versatil.
or the 50mm 1.4mm super shrp also |
|
|
|
07/23/2007 04:56:27 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by TLL061:
does anyone have a canon 24 1.4 and post any examples of a very sharp portrait |
Not portraits, but if you check out this page, you can see a few sample shots with that lens as well as some detailed analysis of it's performance.
|
|
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: 07/22/2025 09:12:23 AM EDT.
