If I could buy only one lens for my Digital Rebel (?)

[mcoupeadam]

Let's say I want to buy one very useful zoom lens for my Digital Rebel. With the assumption that it will be good for bodies beyond the Digital Rebel in the future. What should I get?

The EF 35-350L looks nice, but doesn't appear to be IS (that important?) and might be overkill with the 1.6x multiplier. Do I want all that weight for a 560mm max zoom that I will probably not need anytime soon? I doubt it.

Is there an L series or high end lens in the 28-135ish range? Something better than the EF series? I plan on picking up a few light fixed focal length large aperture lenses over time, but I'd like a nice f2.x-x zoom. I don't mind spending up to $1400 on it assuming it's newer technology and can be used on other cameras as they come along (Hey, even the 1D will be cheap in a year or two!)

Anyways, I'm just getting familiar with the Canon line (long relationship with Minolta but they lost my business when they dragged their butt on the digital SLR scene) I know it might seem odd to spend this much on a lens for a Digital Rebel, but that's my perogative :-) I don't mind spending the money if they lens will be usable years from now.

If someone can point me in the right direction along with your experiences if any, I'd apprecaite it!

Thanks guys!
Adam

[Belmondo]

This is a question you will ultimately have to answer for yourself. I don't have the 35-350, but I have the 100-400 which is similar in size and quality. Believe me, you won't want that as a principaly carry-around lens. It's big, heavy, way too conspicuous, and best used on a tripod. I'd say it might be a better choice as your second lens.

If I had to carry just one lens, it would be my 28-70 f/2.8L. It's a good, usable range, unmatched quality, and a reasonable size.

As to using it on a Rebel, why not? The Rebel is a marvelous, ground-breaking camera capable of producing professional results. It's a camera that shouldn't be hamstrung with inferior optics.

:!: :!: :!: :!:

[Tom W]

Assuming that you already have the "kit" 18-55 mm lens, your most versatile lens might be the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS lens. It isn't "L" glass, but many beleive that it is the best non-L zoom Canon makes.

Of course, you can't go wrong picking up the low-priced 50 mm f/1.8 "standard" lens - it has great optics.

If you really need a wider angle lens, you may have to look at the Sigma 12-24 mm zoom. Canon does not yet have a super-wide zoom in that range.

If you are not satisfied with the 18-55 lens, but like the focal range, you might consider the 17-40 mm f/4.0L lens. It isn't quite as long on tele, but it is very highly rated and will probably be my next lens purchase.

edit: As Tom mentioned, the 28-70 or the newer 24-70 f/2.8L zoom is a very versatile lens as well. I'm keeping an eye on that, though I'm pretty satisfied in that focal length right now.

[mcoupeadam]

The 28-70l is intriguing... that would be ~38-112mm with the multiplier, which would be a pretty usable range. Or the 24-70 would be a little better I guess. I take a lot of pictures of my kids (the perfect subject when they're young... if you can keep em still!) so I want the 80-100mm focal range for portraits. 17-40 wouldn't handle that need as well. I'm used to using fixed 105 or 135 lenses on my Minolta for these purposes, but keeping the 1.6 crud in mind makes me think twice about everything.

Time to hit KEH and eBay and see what these lenses are going for these days...

Thanks again,
Adam

[robertwgross]

Let's say I want to buy one very useful zoom lens for my Digital Rebel. With the assumption that it will be good for bodies beyond the Digital Rebel in the future. What should I get? ...


You need to describe your photographic intentions or intended subjects. That will help dictate what kind of lenses are needed.

If you only intend to shoot the tree in the back yard, that means something. If you intend to shoot a high school football game, that means something else. If you shoot wildlife, that means something else entirely.

---Bob Gross---

[nosquare2003]

It seems that you need to cover the focal length from 28-135 with good glasses. There's no single L lens that cover this range, 35-350 does cover most of the range though. I agree with Tom that it will be too inconvenient as a walk around lens. You may consider 24-70L and 70-200L but these will be over $1,400 (especially you need large aperture lens). For primes, you may consider 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2L (or a cheaper 135/2.8 soft focus) to cover these focal lengths.

[sjprg]

Mcoupeadam:
Why not hold tight another two or three weeks until after PMA. The new cameras and lens will probably be anounced. Rumor is that Minolta will finaly have their DSLR unveiled. Perhaps they were late coming to market to really get a handle on the DSLR and do it right as they have always done. Heres hoping anyway. As a 7i owner if the new DLSR Minolta is as good in its class as the 7i in its class I plan to jump ship and dump all my Canon gear, unless of course Canon really comes through on features, and releases their "BS propritory data" so that 3rd party software can be properly written.
Paul

[Andy_T]

I don't have the Canon 35-350 L.

However, there are a great many threads here that convey the (general) knowledge that it's always a lot harder to build a good lens with a 10x zoom area (full tele divided by full wide -> 350:35) than to build a good, say 3x zoom lens (e.g. 28-70 or 70-200) due to optical limitations.

Most zoom lens tend to be sharpest in the medium zoom area (e.g. 40-50 mm for the 28-70 or 100-150 for the 70-200) and the picture quality falls off on either of the extremes.

For this reason, so-called Hyperzooms (e.g. 28-300) are often used by consumers who like to have to carry around only one lens, but not so often by professional photographers, because these might rather prefer the better image quality of a 28-70 and a 70-200 lens instead. That's also the reason that SLR's have interchangeable lenses for :)

So it's up to you - the increased convenience might result in reduced picture quality.

I don't want to say that the 35-350 is a bad lens - but most people who have used it on this forum will agree that is outperformed any given time by either the 28-70 L, the 70-200 L (f/2.8 or f/4) and the 100-400 L.

Refer to http://www.photozone.de and go to the 'Lens test guide' or http://www.photodo.com - here you have ratings of most lenses there. You'll realize that the 35-350 is better than most other hyperzooms, but that the 'shorter' Canon zooms perform better.

Best regards,
Andy

[daaaveman]

Sigma has their new 80-400 EX OS (Optical Stabilizer) for about $1,200 US. I haven't found any definitive reviews on it yet but it is intriguing. I will say that at 3.6 lbs, it isn't light.

[CoolToolGuy]

I have the 24-70 2.8 'L' and the Drebel. It is a wonderful lens with a good range as a 'normal' zoom. There are a couple of things, however, that you may want to consider:
It is a heavy lens that will definitely let you know that you have been carrying it over the course of a day.
It is a big lens. Long, with a 77mm filter size. It is so big that the built-in flash on the Drebel is not usable due to shadowing from the lens barrel. If you get one and want flash, you need to get an external.


I also have the 28-135 IS. It is also a nice lens. The reach of the 135mm is nice, but 28mm is not wide enough to suit me as a normal lens. I have not tested the shadowing with the flash, but it is definitely smaller than the 24-70. If you want a single lens, it may hinge on whether you want the wide angle or the telephoto, or if the 2.8 of the 'L' glass is meaningful.

My vote is for the 24-70.

Good Luck with it and keep us posted.

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[CyberDyneSystems]

If I were to only have one lens for a DRebel I think I would go 28-135mm IS

By limiting the investment in glass to only one lens I assume that the finaces are limited as well.

Otherwise it makes no sense to attempt to use only one lens. With the Dollars that the 35-350mm costs, you could buy a set of lenses that would be FAR superior in use and flexibilty and image quality to the 35-350mm.

(17-40mm f/4, 50mm f/1.8 and 70-200mm f/4 for example)

So are we talking about a monetary cap here? Or are we just trying to do one lens for the sake of argument?

[mcoupeadam]

Thanks for all the great info so far guys. The 24-70 L sounds fantastic, assuming I don't mind using an accessory flash (like the built in one is good for anything to begin with!)

I travel a lot, and love to take pictures while I'm out and about, but the scenery is never the same, the lighting is never the same, and I don't want to carry my larger bags on the plane. I only shoot for a couple hours at a time, and the DRebel doesn't weigh a thing... so I think I'll save up a little bit and go for the 24-70 L as my primary 'nice' lens along with a good Canon flash, and then pick up a few primes as time goes on. I also love properly lit portrait photography, and I'd enjoy something like the 85mm 1.2 L later on for that purpose (I tend to stick at the far end of the 85-135mm rule as it's less intrusive on the subject)

Last question, and completely unrelated! I understand that the DRebel has inferior flash compensation ability vs. the 10D and up, but I've heard that there are certain accessory flashes which can help with this issue. Can anyone elaborate or tell me I'm nuts?

Thanks!
Adam

[CyberDyneSystems]

If you mount a 550ex or 420 ex you will get the same abilities with the flash as if you mounted it to a 10D :)

The exposure compensation settings are disabled on the Drebel for the built in flash,. but with an external you can still use compensation as allways.

[mcoupeadam]

WHEW!

:?

Guess I'll see if I really need anything past the 420ex. Good news though and exactly what I was hoping to hear.

Thanks!
Adam

[slin100]

If you mount a 550ex or 420 ex you will get the same abilities with the flash as if you mounted it to a 10D :)

The exposure compensation settings are disabled on the Drebel for the built in flash,. but with an external you can still use compensation as allways.
Just want to be sure that no one misinterprets this. FEC can not be easily changed on a 420EX mounted to a Digital Rebel.

[CyberDyneSystems]

DOH!

I beg your pardon!

Is it just the 420? Am I completely wrong here. I thought that the EX flashes alleviated the problem.. will the 550EX do it and the 420 won't?

Wow,. sorry to mislead you.