| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/03/2004 02:50:18 PM · #1 |
Would you go for 1 x EF-S 18-55mm + 1 x EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
or...
1 x EF 28-200mm F3.5-5.6 USM
and why?
and... do all the above lenses do reasonable macro photography? ( I know they are not designed for macro but...)
Message edited by author 2004-05-11 19:20:16.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 03:05:43 PM · #2 |
I'd go for the two separate lenses, for the following reasons:
- I'd want 18mm bottom end
- Quality will probably be better on two lenses (less glass)
- You can always upgrade your telephoto and still carry around the 18-55 without lugging the whole 28-200.
- The 18-55 is mega light, which could be convenient for wandering around
That said, I can't offer any advice about macro photography. :-) |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 03:23:45 PM · #3 |
| I would agree with Paul on his recommendations - in particular I think you would miss the extra 10mm of range at the bottom end. Sometimes that 1.6x multiplier can be brutal. |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 03:53:32 PM · #4 |
I also would agree to go with the (18-55)kit lens and a separate telephoto. Most seem to agree that the 18-55 is a bargain, and yes, you want to be as wide as you can be with the 1.6x crop factor.
With regard to the telephoto end, I would strongly suggest you consider the 70-200 f/4; there is really no comparison in image quality between it and the (much slower) 55-200. You won't be sorry you spent the extra money, it is a bargain for the awesome performance. You'll never miss the 55-70mm gap.
I would also strongly sugggest that you eventually get the 50/1.8, for $70 it will provide you with a fast prime for portrait and low-light work.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:40:23 PM · #5 |
Can you very quickly explain to me this 1.6 crop business. I seem to get the idea (I think) that due the cmos size the picture is cropped? by 1.6? So in my dimage 7i with an equivelant 28-200mm what is the crop factor? Because the images at 200mm have no problems with vignetting or anything else
Message edited by author 2004-05-11 19:20:30.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:47:39 PM · #6 |
Look at this image. I drew rectangles to show how much the 10D (1.6x factor) crops out. The other inner rectangle shows how the 1.4x extender makes a tighter picture.
Originally posted by zeus68:
Can you very quickly explain to me this 1.6 crop business. I seem to get the idea (I think) that due the cmos size the picture is cropped? by 1.6? So in my dimage 7i with an equivelant 28-200mm what is the crop factor? Because the images at 200mm have no problems with vignetting or anything else |
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 04:51:50 PM · #7 |
So what you are saying is if I want to take a picture of a building I might miss some part of it after the photo is taken? Then how come on my dimage 7i when i photograph something the photo is exactly what i saw on the viewfinder
Message edited by author 2004-05-11 19:21:16.
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 05:51:05 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by zeus68:
So what you are saying is if I want to take a picture of a building I might miss some part of it after the photo is taken? |
No, because the viewfinder uses a very similar factor, so you pretty much get what you see. |
|
|
|
05/03/2004 06:38:13 PM · #9 |
the viewfinder is about 95% of the actual image as recorded.
so you'll get a bit extra on the edges - compared to what you see in the viewfinder,
|
|
|
|
05/03/2004 06:40:03 PM · #10 |
the 1.6 factor is comparing the focal range to a standard 35mm slr negative.
so 300mm on a film slr is 300mm
on the digital rebel though - its equivalent to a 480mm ( 300 x 1.6 )lense on the standard 35mm film slr.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2004 02:16:14 PM · #11 |
So... the 18-55mm kit lense with the 300D is 28.8-88 so both my minolta and the 300D start at 28mm. Yes?
Message edited by author 2004-05-11 19:21:25.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2004 02:18:43 PM · #12 |
|
|
|
05/04/2004 02:26:30 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by zeus68:
So... the 18-55mm kit lense with the 300D is 28.8-88 so both my minolta and the 300D start at 28mm. Yes? |
Yes.
About macro then I think no of them you mentioned are true macro lenses. If you look at the lens data (in manuals or on manufactures homepages and some on-line stores) then the minimum focusing distance is important. Less minimum focusing distance better for macro. Canon has both 50mm and 100mm macro lenses (f/2,5 I think). |
|
|
|
05/04/2004 03:11:14 PM · #14 |
Well if my minolta takes some great macros with the built in lense surely even theses lenses might beat it!
Message edited by author 2004-05-11 19:21:41.
|
|
|
|
05/04/2004 03:13:39 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by garlic:
Canon has both 50mm and 100mm macro lenses (f/2,5 I think). |
Canon has a 50mm f/2.5 and 100mm f/2.8 macro lenses. I love my 100mm and I've used the 50mm, but not for macro. |
|
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: 10/31/2025 07:39:08 PM EDT.
