| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/20/2005 11:33:21 PM · #1 |
I have been doing lots of research on what lenses to put on my new 20D. I am far from a fan of the EF-S mounts and am trying to stick to regular EF mounts (I do have the kit 17-55). I have used consumer lenses for a number of years but am looking to move up in lens quality – obviously within constraints.
Most of my photos tend to be of the kids and I need a zoom or two rather than a set of primes. The mid range I would prefer a faster lens while the longer range I can deal with a slower lens since it will mostly be outside. I would prefer to avoid using a flash inside because I always hate the results. I do less wide angle stuff and figure that the kit lens is workable for a while below 28mm but obviously 24 would be better on this end.
I have been trying to rationalise the 24-70 L but it’s just too far out of my budget for a single lens and I suspect a little too heavy to carry around. My latest thinking (well stealing from a lot of various places rather than my real thoughts – what did we do before Google?) is to look at the following instead of the single 24-70 :-
- Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
- Canon 70-200L f4 (much as I would like the 2.8 IS it’s too too much $ wise).
- Canon 50 1.8 (only since it’s cheap on $ and a fair bit faster than the 2.8).
- Use the extra for flash-cards, whatever.
What do you think of this combo? I am a little wary of non-Canon lenses but from what I can see of this specific Tamron it looks like a good deal for a lens that seems to be on the better end of the range. Some of the 100% crops I have seen appear very close to the 24-70 L but I am sure there are some catch given the price difference. |
|
|
|
06/20/2005 11:43:53 PM · #2 |
Check out the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC for about $420-500. Nice lens, tons better than the kit lens.
The Canon 70-200 f4 is nice, but with add a hood and it'll run ya $600 or so. I've started looking for a cheaper alternative, till then I have a Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 APO. Good value for the money, but not in the Canon's league image wise.
I have the 50mm 1.8. Useful for some things. Tiny and light. Not sure how much i might use it since i got the Sigma 18-50. have to do some tests and decide.
I have several lenses and all are just fine, canon or not. The Sigma lenses include hoods and cases (with belt loops). Nice extra touch.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2005 01:14:19 AM · #3 |
| All three lens will serve you well. I suggest getting your hands on the Tamron first and test its performance at 50mm. I think it compares well against the 50 1.8 prime. After getting the Tamron, I really haven't had much use for the prime. Good luck! |
|
|
|
06/21/2005 01:31:15 AM · #4 |
i just got my 20d with the 18-55 usm kit lens as well
and i also got a 50mm f/1.8 prime too
anddd my next lens is the 70-200 f/4 L usm :)
cant wait
although i can hold off on the low range since i can get by with the kit lens for now...but i neeeed the zoom and the 70-200 sounds EXCELLENT for the price!! |
|
|
|
06/21/2005 06:38:51 AM · #5 |
You may want something shorter than 28mm, which is 44.8mm when you multiply by the 1.6 crop factor. I have a Sigma 24-70 f2.8, and bought the Sigma 12-24 becasue 24mm wasn't wide enough.
Also consider other 70-200mm lenses than Canon's if money is an issue.
You said you wern't a fan of EF-S, and indicated that money was an issue, and that you prefered zooms. If money is more important than EF-S, consider the Sigma 18-200, and one of the 24-60/24-70/28-75 f2.6 lenses for indoor use. |
|
|
|
06/21/2005 06:45:33 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by robs:
- Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) |
Excellent substitute for the 24-70/2.8L, but bear in mind this will likely be almost as heavy.
Originally posted by robs:
- Canon 70-200L f4 (much as I would like the 2.8 IS it’s too too much $ wise). |
Another excellent lens. An alternative, and only slightly lower in quality is the Sigma 70-200/2.8EX at around $800. You don't get IS, but you will get the f/2.8. Bear in mind these lenses start getting heavy, and you may not want to carry them around, depending on your use.
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
The Canon 70-200 f4 is nice, but with add a hood and it'll run ya $600 or so. |
According to B&H the 70-200/4L comes with a lens hood, as I believe all L's do.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2005 07:20:24 AM · #7 |
Originally posted by robs:
- Tamron Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
|
I just got this lens on Friday, and shot a wedding with it on Saturday. I absolutely love it, had another one delivered yesterday to use on my 10D.
Originally posted by robs:
- Canon 50 1.8 (only since it’s cheap on $ and a fair bit faster than the 2.8). |
Love this lens too, and use it a lot, especially with kids.
|
|
|
|
06/22/2005 04:58:44 PM · #8 |
Thanks for all the thoughts. Some responses (in no order) ->
- The Canon 70-200L f4 appears to have the hood and pouch included (as Paul noted) but not all sites say that. Anybody else know for recent new models?
- I have convinced myself that the Tamron 28-75 is the way for me to go on the mid-range but now I cannot seem to find anybody that has one in stock for the Canon mount - Figures! I have some time to wait before summer hols and since I already have lenses that work, I can pretend to be patient (not to mention that if I get the 70-200, that will give me something new to play with in the mean time:-).
- The weight of the 28-75 is around 1/2 of the Canon 24-70 (510g vs. 950g), so that is a good thing for a walk-around lense given the closeness of the image quality - the fact it's 1/3 of the price is not exactly hurting:). To be honest I am still wary of a non-canon lense but we will see how it goes.
- Thanks for the reference to the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. I will keep that in mind when I fill out the short end (along with the 17-40L f4 and maybe something crazy in the 15mm range) but right now I have most use for the mid and mid-tele ranges.
- I plan to see how the Tamron 2.8 goes @50mm before getting the 50mm f1.8 prime but I also might just pick it up anyway since it's less than the price of a memory card (ok, so I like the fast 1Gb cards). I like the idea of getting into low-light photography, so it might be a good thing to play around with on top of the 2.8 anyway (and no after seeing how that last darkness challenge went, I am not likely to show you the pics :-). |
|
|
|
06/22/2005 09:45:49 PM · #9 |
If you don't need anything wider than 28mm, then I think it's a really nice combo of lenses. Probably the best bang for the bucks that you will get.
I think the Tamron will be an excellent starting point for walking around lenses. My buddy just got one delivered from digitalfotoclub.com and I think they are coming in.
Although the 50mm lens is cheap, I'd hold off on it unless you have specific needs for it b/c the Tamron at 50mm at f2.8 is quiet a good lens as well.
Another option is the Sigma 70-200mm EX f2.8, similar in price to the L lens but faster.
Once again, I find that the 28mm is not wide enough for me and would recommend you consider something wider as well. Such as the Tamron 17-35, Tamron 11-18, Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-22/12-24, Canon 10-22.
Good luck.
Message edited by author 2005-06-22 21:52:46.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 08:22:17 AM EDT.
