DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> A little help with lenses :)
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 25, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/05/2004 09:33:05 PM · #1
Hey. I am looking at getting a new lens and have a couple of questions i was hoping someone could help me with.

Ok to start, I am just getting into photography seriously. Im not real good, but its fun and it relaxes me a lot. Well, im still using the 18-55mm lens that i got with my camera and it sometimes frustrates me because I cant get close enough to get the photos that i want. So im looking into getting tele lens. There are quite a few brands out there and i was wondering which ones are worth my while. Specifically if sigma is any good, cos it is cheaper than the canon glass. Also are some of the special features like IS and USM worth dishing out a couple extra bucks for the canon in the long run.

Oh also what do you think would be a good focal length, should i go for a zoom or prime lens, and any other helpful info.

Thanks
 12/05/2004 10:03:20 PM · #2
Give us a budget and we can go from there. I'd never recommend buying cheap lenses to start, because you usually just end up buying more expensive ones down the road anyways. Better lenses usually hold their value quite nicely, too.
12/05/2004 10:08:23 PM · #3
I've got the Sigma 70-300mm Super Macro II APO and it's a great lens for the money. You should be able to get it for around $180.
 12/05/2004 10:18:41 PM · #4
im not really able to spend more than 4, and thats at most. I would like something useable for less, but if i have to spend it i want to be sure i dont regret it
12/05/2004 10:24:17 PM · #5
Check out KEH.com. You can find some good deals on used glass there.
 12/05/2004 10:26:14 PM · #6
I'm not sure what you are shooting, but an Canon 85 f/1.8 (x1.6=136mm) will give you some more reach, is fast at maximum of f/1.8, and the quality is fantastic.
 12/05/2004 10:31:03 PM · #7
Originally posted by Coenny:
im not really able to spend more than 4, and thats at most. I would like something useable for less, but if i have to spend it i want to be sure i dont regret it


Add an extra $155 and you get the fantastically sharp and versatile Canon 70-200mm f/4L zoom for $555. A bargain for such a high quality lens.
 12/05/2004 10:37:26 PM · #8
oh yeah i would prefer a 58mm lens so i can use all my existing filters.
Speaking of which what advantages are there from different lens diameters.
 12/05/2004 11:03:21 PM · #9
A wider lens diameter usually means more light, so you'll be able to use a faster shutter speed than a lens with a smaller diameter in the same lighting conditions. Focal length must be taken into account. In order for a telephoto lens to get as much light as a wide-angle, it will have a larger diameter.

Message edited by author 2004-12-05 23:04:25.
 12/05/2004 11:21:14 PM · #10
ok thanks.
 12/05/2004 11:36:02 PM · #11
Originally posted by Coenny:
oh yeah i would prefer a 58mm lens so i can use all my existing filters.
Speaking of which what advantages are there from different lens diameters.


The Sigma 70-300 APO Super MAcro is a 58mm filter size. It's a good lens, for the money, but if your serious about photogrpahy, you'll probably outgrow it fairly soon. Nick's suggestion (Canon 70-200 f/4 L) is a very good one. I had the Sigma and recently upgraded to the Canon L. What a difference! Spend the extra now and save yourself the trouble of having to sell the Sigma in the next few months.
02/02/2005 02:51:39 PM · #12
I'm in the same boat and I have the kit 18-55, 28-135IS, 55-200 USM II, and just ordered the Sigma 70-300 APO.
I'd recommend the Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens or a Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto 35-135mm f/4-5.6 EF (USM) Autofocus Lens. They are both about $300 and have similar optics and features as the 28-135IS (except the IS). These lenses have a "FTM" feature that lets you manually focus the lens without flipping switches to finetune the focus. Very handy. These are also good range of focal length for "walking around" and taking photos. I find that the 55-200 has too much telephoto for this and the 70-300 range will need a tripod for the 300 end and it's too long for general use. I'd start off with a midrange zoom and then expand to long telephoto lens if you decide that's what you are interested in.
 02/02/2005 03:09:36 PM · #13
I've posted about this before, but one thing I've discovered about SLRs and multiple lenses is that they're too much to carry, and too slow to change. If you are new to photography as you say, consider one of the wide range zooms (often called superzooms) which might meet all your needs. It will be somewhat redundant with your 18-55, but if you shop carefully, you will get a better lens.

I have and would be pretty happy with, as my only lens, the Sigma 18-125. It's really great, sharp, good colors, low distortion and fringing, etc. Only con is that it's not quiet like the USM lenses and it's F3.5/5.6, depending on focal length. But it's only $250.

There's also a new Tamron 18-200 coming out. I don't know if it's any good.

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 15:10:12.
 02/02/2005 03:28:56 PM · #14
Originally posted by Coenny:
should i go for a zoom or prime lens, Thanks


I would think that if you were frustrated with the 18-55 then a prime lens would frustrate you even more...for lack of versatility. You could always get the Canon 28-105mm all purpose lens for around $200. It's not the best lens ever made but it's better than the kit lens you're toting and offers more zoom as well.
 02/02/2005 04:05:26 PM · #15
I'd actually suggest something radical. Start out simple. Get a $150 Quantaray or Sigma lens in the 75-300 zoom range. Don't break the piggy bank on expensive glass until you have a better idea of what you'd like to do. You may dish out $500 for an IS (Image stabalized lens) and then decide you hate the hobby. Or you may get a 70-200 L lens and then decide that you want to do macro work.

Either of those lenses will take a 58mm filter. I think that may make more sense starting out. If you decide you want to add a second lens, get the 50mm 1.8.

Clara
 02/02/2005 04:06:05 PM · #16
Sigma Zoom Normal-Telephoto 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX APO RF HSM

The "Bigma" is a lens that covers an awful lot of ground and gives excellent image quality. It's fairly expensive at about $900, and some people call it heavy at 4.1 pounds, but it's range and quality are top notch. You won't have to change lenses very often.
02/02/2005 04:24:25 PM · #17
Originally posted by coolhar:
It's fairly expensive at about $900, and some people call it heavy at 4.1 pounds, but it's range and quality are top notch. You won't have to change lenses very often.


that's about twice what the budget mentioned is...doh!
 02/02/2005 04:26:32 PM · #18
If you're looking for more reach, save up for the Canon 70-200 f/4L that others have mentioned. You won't regret it. If just you want a better all-purpose lens with a little more zoom, get the Tamron 28-75 XR Di f/2.8- a truly great lens for $369.
 02/02/2005 04:37:41 PM · #19
A well respected lens is the Canon 28-135mm IS USM. Good average range.
 02/02/2005 04:37:56 PM · #20
What's the deal with THIS???
I tempted to buy it, but I want to know if it is worth the dough? I'm not looking for a great lens, it will be my first non-kit lens so I don't care if it is just mediocre.

Message edited by author 2005-02-02 16:45:12.
 02/02/2005 04:53:50 PM · #21
Originally posted by coolhar:
Sigma Zoom Normal-Telephoto 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX APO RF HSM

The "Bigma" is a lens that covers an awful lot of ground and gives excellent image quality. It's fairly expensive at about $900, and some people call it heavy at 4.1 pounds, but it's range and quality are top notch. You won't have to change lenses very often.


It's pure junk compared to most Canon glass. Lets put it this way, I was far happier the day I sold that lens then the day I bought it and I am usually a very happy person any day I get a new lens to play with. Worse image quality then any other Sigma, Nikon, Pentax or Canon glass I have ever owned in spite of all the rave reviews. Hard to aquire focus quickly too. It hunts a lot, especially in moderate light. And the zoom slips down when you lean foreward unless you lock it which totally defeats the purpose of having a zoom. And it is quick to get dust in it as it is not sealed well.

Wouldn't recomend.
 02/02/2005 05:07:39 PM · #22
Originally posted by nsbca7:
Originally posted by coolhar:
Sigma Zoom Normal-Telephoto 50-500mm f/4.0-6.3 EX APO RF HSM

The "Bigma" is a lens that covers an awful lot of ground and gives excellent image quality. It's fairly expensive at about $900, and some people call it heavy at 4.1 pounds, but it's range and quality are top notch. You won't have to change lenses very often.


It's pure junk compared to most Canon glass. Lets put it this way, I was far happier the day I sold that lens then the day I bought it and I am usually a very happy person any day I get a new lens to play with. Worse image quality then any other Sigma, Nikon, Pentax or Canon glass I have ever owned in spite of all the rave reviews. Hard to aquire focus quickly too. It hunts a lot, especially in moderate light. And the zoom slips down when you lean foreward unless you lock it which totally defeats the purpose of having a zoom. And it is quick to get dust in it as it is not sealed well.

Wouldn't recomend.


Sorry to hear you had such a bad evperience with a lens. Perhaps you had a bad copy.
 02/02/2005 05:13:41 PM · #23
Originally posted by coolhar:
Sorry to hear you had such a bad evperience with a lens. Perhaps you had a bad copy.


At $900 a pop I don't try twice.
 02/02/2005 05:22:33 PM · #24
Yesterday my Tokina 24-200 ATX 242 AF arrived. Took it out today for a test and very pleased with the results. Great value for money.

Some reviews here //www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=176&sort=7&cat=40&page=1

One I Took this morning



Only added some USM but otherwise its as it came out of the camera
Focus is quick and it feels like a proper lens! Solid and well built, quick focus and zoom is smooth.

Seen it for around $300 but no doubt if you searched you could find it cheaper. I paid £179 here in the UK.


02/02/2005 05:23:56 PM · #25
This is one sweet lens for (I've seen) 349.00 and up.

Tamron AF28-300MM F/3.5-6.3 XR Di

I dropped 399.00 for mine at a local mom and pop shop a week ago and so far have found it to be quite amazing. Seldom need the kit lens except for 18mm wide...and I can handhold this and still get good shots at the long end. Not L quality but on a budget it is a great piece of glass.

Andy
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 01:44:22 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 04/25/2024 01:44:22 AM EDT.