Lenses for DSLR
- Started
- Last post
- 26 Responses
- mbr
I believe I have finally decided (thanks to everyone's help and opinions in my previous post) to go with Canon dslrs for my father and sister.
Main reason is the lenses are exchangeable, so they could share future lenses (don't know it that will happen, but seems like a good idea).Canon 40D
Canon xti (400D)Question: what should I do about the lenses? It seems to be the consensus that Canon's kit lenses are not that great.
What would be a good idea for an inexpensive alternative? I don't want to pay for anything crazy, just get the most bang for the buck.
Any ideas/thoughts would be great.
Thanks
- colin_s0
for my 20d i have the niftyfifty (50mm f/1.8) and the sigma ex f/2.8 18-50mm macro. i'd recommend trying out sigma lenses because canon lenses are ridiculously expensive. it works just fine on the 20 and so it should be no prob with the 40 or the rebel.
due to the crop factors of dslrs, i'd get something relatively open (like a 18-50 or maybe a 24-70) so that way you're still able to shoot 'at' 35mm. if they're just going to be recreationally shooting, maybe get more of an allover lens like an 24-100.
sigma's lenses are at http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses… and canon's are http://www.usa.canon.com/consume…
again, canon's a little pricey save for a few select lenses, but either way you're going to get what you pay for.
- mbr0
Thanks. I think the more basic lenses are fine for now (this is nice stuff already).
Do these look like good kits to start with? Seemed like good deals to me (but I don't have a dslr myself):
- yeah, that's a decent deal. the body of the 40 is worth about a grand and the rebel is kind of just a toy.colin_s
- botbot0
Get a 5D. Nothing better than a proper Full-Frame camera. Although you have to sell a lung or an eye before you can make that purchase. Buts its all worth it.
- rafalski0
just curious, what does fullframe do for you botbot?
- mbr0
I think I'll already be auctioning off an organ after buying these (although it's a family chip-in thing)
- pr20
i don't know if it's for your pops then any SLR is an over kill. Buy a camera that will actually get used rather then the one that looks cool and pro.
- scottON0
the 'full frame' 5d is over rated. the camera itself is very nice and well worth the money spent, as is NEARLY any DSLR (-nikon d40 heh...) especially right now as the price has gone way down. But the full frame is entirely overrated and I would suggest that you do not base any purchase on solely that. 'Full frame' only means that the frame size is not cropped (A known trait of previous DSLRs) and is the same size as a 35mm frame. However the name 'full frame' is deceiving because there are other sized films, such as APS and medium format (120). So it is not necessarily full frame, it is full 35mm frame - and if you're not familiar with an old 35mm camera, or if your dad isn't coming from shooting film to digital, there is far less appreciation and from what I've seen notice-ability (for those users).
Sigma makes very nice lenses for the price. The sigma fixed 50mm f/1.8 as mentioned above is some very fast, very sharp glass. Any lens with a fixed aperture will always be very sharp.
And yes you are correct the canon kit lens (generally an 17/18-50/55 f/3.5-5.6/6/etc ) is basically a starter lens. If these cameras aren't going to be making money for the users, a large investment isn't quite necessary, this lens will suffice for purely recreational shooting and learning.
I personally appreciate wide angle more than zoom, a 12 - 24 would be a nice lens if you can find it cheap enough (f/3.5 will be the cheaper version of it).
- scottON0
prices* have* *for all DSLRs*
- botbot0
Currently, I dont own a DSLR. I only shoot film, that too only for fun.
Full-Frame cameras collect more information on their sensor. The same amount of information that a 35mm film collects upon exposure. This leads to much detailed photography that you can blow up without loosing any quality. A camera with a smaller sensor than a full-frame crops the image. But a full-frame sensor give you the same focal length as on a 35mm film camera. So, you will be able to capture a wider scene with the same lens size on a full-frame camera than a non-full-frame camera.
- sofakingzero0
Check out this site, good info and reviews.
- rafalski0
I know what it is, I know how it works botbot, just curious what it does for you. There is one f-stop DOF advantage I agree.
Wide angle can easily be replaced with a crop-format wide angle lens though (ie 17-40 with 10-22 or so), so that doesn't give me much.
I'd lose the extra zoom cropped frame gives me and this is a deal-breaker for me.In the end the question is: does fullframe show on images? I know people who say it does add some punch to the image, not knowing how to explain it.
- i have the 10-22 on my 30d, i love the straight/sharp angles it produces, no "bubbling" at allversion3
- 10-22 is amazingly well corrected (no barrel distortion) for something that wide. Well worth the money.slappy
- i want! i want!
the 10-22 dat it! i wish i had a rich uncle that would buy it for me for christmas! :)lvl_13 - There is a 10-20 sigma thats cheaper but its not as good in many ways.slappy
- botbot0
I prefer full-frame because its a closer shooting experience to a 35mm camera. Just a personal preference, very subjective.
Oh, and it does add some punch to the image.
- slappy0
The 18-55 kit is soft in the corners, soft until f8 and suffers from warm spots on long exposures. The front of the lens spins when it focuses throwing off your circular polariser settings if you use one (they are good).
The 17-85 IS USM is definately much better and the IS is really handy in low light without a tripod.
For me the best "bang for buck" was the Canon 17-40mm L. Colours and contrast are great, its sharp and no real barrel distortion or vignetting to speak of. Its also quite flare resistant. Build quality is excellent to and it weather sealed once a filter is added to the lens. The lens doesnt extent or contract while zooming so these lenses arnt fazed by dust or fungus (yes fungus is common in humid conditions).
I use this with a 70-200L as the main two in my bag. These lenses do add up but they are by no means over kill.
I have used some ok sigma lenses but their QA from the factory doesnt seem to be that great with friends returning lenses a few times on average before getting "good copies".
- The Canon 17-40mm L
I have this one as well and definitely agree.lherb
- The Canon 17-40mm L
- ok_not_ok0
Go Prime! Zoo lenses are for soccer moms.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/pr…
- version30
prime lenses do have f-stop benefits but not very versatile, i love my 75-300 when it's bright out
- quick question: why the fuck don't you get up into the ntphe v3 thread and join up?
:)lvl_13 - it finally matches your name for fuck sake. ha!lvl_13
- i'm still bitter from the ntpe exchange, the turnaround is poor,version3
- but hey, if you want a print of anything in the flickr, just hit me up, i'll send you an 8x10 :)version3
- you should join, I'm sending out my best 18x12s this round :) If you get lvl_13 or nicnichols in your group your bound to get some cool shite too.slappy
- ...some cool shite.slappy
- i'll be printing hopefully 13X19 depending on quality....jaylarson
- quick question: why the fuck don't you get up into the ntphe v3 thread and join up?
- scottON0
canon hates you. ha
- defender0
Lens choice depends on ones shooting style.
Someone who shoots mostly indoors would benefit with a lower f-stop.
Someone who shoots outdoors would benefit with a longer lens.
It all depends on ones style.
- mbr0
no style yet, just looking for advice on good starter sets.
Sounds like the generic lenses will be ok until they decide how far they want to go (and if they don't use the cameras, I could sure use a nice new one!) :-)