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

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> I broke a lens at work! Need advice for a new one.
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 14 of 14, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/10/2008 05:15:55 AM · #1
Yes... I am a klutz. I was moving a light and and i must have bumped the tripod or something because the camera fell right on the lens and it got jammed. The camera is a standard Canon Rebel XT and it was the kit lens so not too much harm since they wanted a nicer one anyhow.

So on to... what is a nice lens... I think they want it in the $400-1000 range. Not sure they are gunna go up that high yet but my boss wants to. What would be a good lens for their product photography needs? I already suggested this one:

Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

but wanted to get some second opinions or suggestions.

here is what we shoot:

Beer Stuff

pretty simple! very few none (just looked through and they haven't put any of them up yet) of the shots are mine BTW because I am new and leaving soon anyhow. :) Just did a bit of freelance for them.

Thanks!

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 05:22:04.
01/10/2008 06:07:25 AM · #2
How about the 17-55/2.8? I've only heard good things about it.
01/10/2008 06:43:46 AM · #3
Cant beat the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 for the price... I am completely jealous btw, do you get free beer from the companies???
01/10/2008 06:44:19 AM · #4
Whats your budget?

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 06:44:34.
01/10/2008 07:00:33 AM · #5
I have the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens. I bought it with one of my 20D's so it was the "kit lens" on that camera, which saved me about $100 on the lens. I like the range ... going all the way from a true wide angle (17mm on a 16.x crop is about 27mm) to a short, but decent, telephoto at 85mm. The range gives it a lot of "walk around ability". I used it a LOT when I first bought it.

Now the down sides:
- It's a slow lens. That f/4-5.6 really hurts when it comes to shooting in low light. The lens is basically useless for my wedding work.

- Lots of chromatic aberration. This just isn't a really sharp lens. Probably BECAUSE of the range (it's very hard to have that kind of range AND get high quality optics in the same lens). I figure, it's good for walk around shots. But not for portraits or anything where you care about a nice sharp image.

- I've decided that IS on anything but a long lens is basically useless. At 17mm you could easily handhold just about any exposure you would want to shoot at anyway. And 85mm really isn't all that long. So IS really doesn't buy you very much on this lens.

- And yet it's probably the IS that makes the lens cost so darn much. Because it's not the quality of the optics. So I feel like it's way over priced for what you are getting. (note: I paid about $600 for it, I see that it has come down in price a little ... B&H has it for $524, Amazon has it for $478).

My opinion? I wouldn't buy it again. Certainly not at the price I paid. If it dropped down into the $300-$400 range I would consider it and would probably use it on vacations and such so that I don't have to carry lots of lenses. But not much else.

For the price range you are probably looking at ... I'm afraid I don't have a lot of experience to offer. I love my Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. It has decent range (not as much as the 17-85), but I use it mostly on my 5D when I want true wide angle, or on my Mark III (1.3x crop) when I want it to be a little longer. It's a fast lens, at a constant f/2.8 which is important to me and my work. And the optics are top notch, very sharp, usable for portraits, landscapes, etc. But it costs a lot more (about $1100). This lens, I feel, is worth the price you pay for it. It doesn't have IS. But like I said above, for this range, I don't think you need it anyway.

Coming back down out of the stratosphere... You'll get a lot of recommendations here on DPC for the Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di. It's a constant f/2.8. It has "decent" range (not quite as wide nor as long as the Canon 17-85) and the optics are decent and about the quality you expect for the price you are paying (Amazon has it for $365). I used this lens right up until I bought the Canon 24-70 lens and would buy it again at this price. It's not an L lens. But it's not an L price either.


01/10/2008 08:39:16 AM · #6
I would second the Tamron.
It is inexpensive, sharp, fast, and allows for close focus.
01/10/2008 08:53:43 AM · #7
The Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC MACRO is my primary lens. (With my 30D's 1.6 conversion factor that's about 27-80mm, which is a nice range.) It's tack sharp between 5.6 and 11 all the way to the edges, and the fixed 2.8 speed lets me hand-hold in most lighting, even sunset.

Been using Sigma lenses for years and never been disappointed. Main advantage: I can get a lens that's very close in quality and sharpness to a Canon lens for half the price and at 3-4 stops faster. This lens won several awards in 2007 for quality. Here's a link. It's a bit out of the price range you mentioned but well worth the extra bucks.

Good luck!
Michael

//www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3320&navigator=6

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 08:56:59.
01/10/2008 08:58:12 AM · #8
I wouldn't recomend them except if you want something a bit better and a lot more expensive than kit lense. If you want a zoom lense, the tamron 28-75 has lots of good opinions. Also the tamron 17-50, that is the efs version of the first.
If you want to do a lot of study stuff, maybe you would prefer a prime. I have Canon 100 2.8 Macro which is an incredible sharp lense, but maybe a bit too long for study shots.

Álex.
01/10/2008 09:06:07 AM · #9
Originally posted by jonr:

How about the 17-55/2.8? I've only heard good things about it.


The best portrait lens I've ever had. I use it 90% of the time now both in studio & out. The wide end is great for larger groups and the clarity/sharpness just can't be beat. WELL worth the investment.
01/10/2008 09:42:46 AM · #10
For product shots, I'd suggest the 24mm tilt-shift lens, or, maybe the 45mm version of the same thing.

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 09:43:10.
01/10/2008 10:37:12 AM · #11
for that product line, I would use the 24-105 f4L IS. I think its wide enough for the larger items and has a good reach for working w/ smaller items in a light tent. Its just at the end of your price range, $1000 give or take a few bucks.

That lens is being used as a kit lens for a lot of 5D packages by the way. BH has the 5D w/ that for $2700, not a bad deal, sell the lens on ebay for $800+ and you got yourself a very good price for a 5D body. Just an FYI.

Message edited by author 2008-01-10 10:38:21.
01/11/2008 12:28:49 AM · #12
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

For product shots, I'd suggest the 24mm tilt-shift lens, or, maybe the 45mm version of the same thing.

the same one for only $1070
01/11/2008 03:35:21 PM · #13
hmmm now I'm confused. I wanted the wide range because they shoot anything from very small objects like bolts, to huge objects like bar units.

would it be better to suggest 2 different lenses then? :/
01/11/2008 07:15:28 PM · #14
Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

for that product line, I would use the 24-105 f4L IS. I think its wide enough for the larger items and has a good reach for working w/ smaller items in a light tent. Its just at the end of your price range, $1000 give or take a few bucks.

ditto - great lens.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/24/2020 06:42:39 PM

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 © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/24/2020 06:42:39 PM EST.