Lenses 101

[Malok]

I'm considering upgrading from my G3 to a Drbebel. My focus is landscape photography and my question relates to lenses. I need to purchase a lense or two that will give me a significant wide angle and I also need considerable zoom to isolate shots. I almost always shoot with a tripod and at the lowest ISO settings possible.

I have never purchased an independent lens before. Where do I start, what are the issues I need to consider? My budget is limited, but quality is important as I sell enlargements at various stores and galleries in my area.

Any help to this newbie would be greatly appreciated!

Malok

[Scottes]

Sounds like 2 lenses. What's the absolute budget?

[Scottes]

The G3 is 35-140mm. In DRebel terms, because of the 1.6 crop factor, this comes to 22-88mm. So a 22mm lens on the DRebel will give you the same picture/field of view as the G3 did at 35.

Do you wish to go wider? Longer? Or does the G3 handle the lens lengths you wish to have on the DRebel?

[Malok]

I'd like to keep my prices down if possible to definitely under $1,000 and more preferably near $500.

More than anything, I want to learn the thinking behind buying a lens rather than just knowing which lens(es) to get.

Thanks!

Malok

[toglenn]

Picking the right lens is probably the most discussed subject on Photo forums. Everyone has their opinion and often don't agree.

There are many classes of lenses as well as price ranges. There are zoom lenses and prime lenses. Zoom lenses are the most flexable but primes are said to give better results.

When I bought my first lens for a new Canon D30 I chose an inexpensive zoom lens, Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 and I still use that lens today, I think it's a terrific bargain. Others will argue the point.

I'd suggest reading the posts on the photo forums and you'll start to form your own opinions. Good lenses have pretty good resale value so if you change your mind down the line, you won't lose as much as you would with a camera.

You should get lots of opinions and they'll give all kinds of views. There is no perfect lens!

toglenn

[Scottes]

Toglenn is right, but that's hard work, and many of us here don't mind helping out. But it sounds like you willing to do some work. :)

There's a lot of things behind a lens, and points to consider. Chromatic aberration, barrel distortion, pincushion, clarity - all these come under "quality of the glass" I guess - but have different effects on the final image.

Auto-focus speed can be important - just how fast will it focus on an object.

Contrast will also affect AF speed, but better lenses give better contrast in a picture. Again, quality of glass.

Max aperture - will it handle low-light situations?

I could go on...


My recommendation might be to check http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ and check prices of various lenses. Find ones that fit your budget and parameters (length, aperture, etc). Go out and research them.

In the EOS Digital forum there's a link at the top - All The Best Links. You can find mention of some great review and comparison sites. Google for the lens, and search the archives here.

Rule out the lenses that seem to be junk. Of those remaining, find the one(s) that seem to be the best bargain for the money.

And if you wish, ask us here to compare your choices with you.

[nosquare2003]

Malok, I'm not going to recommend any lens to you. But I'd like to point out:

- is your tripod good enough?
- you may have to consider the additional cost for polariser, ND filter (that you're using)
- do you need to buy some more CF cards? Extra battery? Remote?
- do you have any software to process photos?

IMHO, don't use all the money on lenses from the very beginning...

[CyberDyneSystems]

Malok,

You have some reading to do! :wink:

One option would be to just start on page 1 of the EOS forum here and start reading any threads that mention lenses..

At first it may seem a little confusing you'll start to piece some if it together.

[Malok]

Thanks for the many helpful comments. I realize that there is a lot of homework to do. I noticed that on the EOS forum there were over 270 pages of reading. That's almost like my Master's courses at college!

In response to the questions that nosquare2003 asked, I have a decent manfrotto tripod, pleanty of memory, I use filters that fit with the Cokin P system and so I won't have to buy many extras apart from the camera and lenses. I would like to go wider than my G3. If I could get a 17 or 18 and be able to zoom to close to 300 that would be terrific. Is it true that the Drebel increases the magnification of the lenses. This would be great for the telephoto, but a loss on the wide angle.

One person recommended that I consider a package with two sigma lenses that might meet my need. How do these look to you?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&sku=304150&is=USA &si=feat#goto_itemInfo

Thanks for this great first lesson. The initial knowledge I get here will help me to understand what I am reading as I do my homework.

Thanks!

Malok

[CyberDyneSystems]

Pricewise they are a great deal.. but my bet is you will be disappointed with the images/performance and build quality. Don't get me wrong,. Sigma makes some great lenses, but they make some cheap ones to.. (usually indicated by there cheap price :) )


Get the Rebel with the kit lens,. (your first cheap lens)

Then you may want to get a 50mm f/1.8 so you can compare the optics of a cheap zoom to an inexpensive but optically near perfect prime.. then go from there.

[dtrayers]

Here's a pretty good article from Bob Atkins on lens selection for the 300D/10D:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/300D/EOS_300D_lenses.html

[Malok]

Great article! Very helpful. Thank you! :D

[Jesper]

Have a look at the Canon EOS Beginner's FAQ (http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/). It's mainly about EOS film-based cameras, but it also has an extensive section about EF lenses.

Also have a look at Canon EF Lenses Home (http://www.usa.canon.com/html/eflenses/) - Canon's official page with info on all their current EF lenses.

[PaulB]

Malok,
Welcome to the DSLR world.

If you are an absolute beginner with a DSLR and are thinking of buying a 300D/DRebel then I would opt for the 18-55mm lens that comes as the 'standard' zoom.
By all accounts this lens is an reasonable performer, but will not break the bank.
You can then get to know the camera and explore the its' use without being bothered about changing lenses for a while - use it just like your G3 in fact (the 18-55mm will act like a 28-90mm would on the G3).
When you have got to grips with your camera then you will come to realise where you personally need to go in longer/wider/faster lenses - this is where all the reading others have suggested will tie-in to your experience. Then the drain on the bank account will start.....................
If you decide you need a 10D then you do not have the option of the 18-55mm unfortunatly as it only fits the 300D (Sigma make an equivalent though, but I don't have any knowledge of how it performs - it's priced about the same as the Canon one I believe).
All the best.

[msvadi]

I'm a little bit confused by the reviews on 75-300 lens. Some people say it is good enough for the price. Others say that it's practically useless at the 300mm end, because images are never sharp.
What do you guys think?

[Malok]

That is what I have read as well about the 75-300. I almost purchased it, but the many bad reviews put me off. Someone said it was like buying a fancy stereo system and then putting toy speakers on it. I just ordered the 70-200 4L. It has great reviews and the price is in the same neighborhood. It doesn't reach as long, but the reviews say that it is crystal clear as far as it reaches.

Malok

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'm a little bit confused by the reviews on 75-300 lens. Some people say it is good enough for the price. Others say that it's practically useless at the 300mm end, because images are never sharp.
What do you guys think?

The best 300mm lenses cost over $3,000.00

With that in mind,. a super cheap $100.00 lens that offers 300mm can be looked at two ways.

1. Good enough given the low price. (if price is a primary concern,. the pics could look like they came out of a "Viewmaster" and still be considered good enough at 1/30th the cost of the best 300mm.)

2. Not worth bothering with despite the low cost. It's just that bad.

Now, I do not speak from experience on this particualr lens,. so it may not be as bad as I make it out to be here..

My only point is this. What does "good enough for the price" mean? and is that something you want?

[msvadi]

Thanks, guys.

Actually, my friend have bought 75-300 USM, so I'll try it and see if it looks good enough for the price.

To add to my confusion, the articles that people mention in this thread say that the "IS" version is much better, but the "USM" is only marginally better. On the other hand, the guy at B&H I talked to said that the "IS" was not that good on that lens. He said it was one of their first IS and the IS did not work very well. Besides, the price of the IS lens gets close to the 70-200 f/4 L.

What do you guys think of 100-300 compared to 75-300?

And one more question. Someone on this forum has mentioned that it is possible to find a used 100-300 5.6 L lens for about $300. What do you guys think about it?

Thanks

[Volatile]

read that canon beginner's faq carefully. it's a good read and will address you exact questions. i have read it through about 5 times now, and still go back to it.

[sdommin]

I'm considering upgrading from my G3 to a Drbebel. My focus is landscape photography and my question relates to lenses. I need to purchase a lense or two that will give me a significant wide angle and I also need considerable zoom to isolate shots. I almost always shoot with a tripod and at the lowest ISO settings possible. Malok

I would recommend that you get the 17-40L. That's under $1000, and will be a great lens for landscapes. Put off getting a telephoto until you become very familiar with your new camera and this lens, then get the telephoto later (besides, that way your wallet will get a rest). I always say that you should get the minimum equipment possible and learn to use it well. Then, you'll know automatically what you need next.

[msvadi]

After spending hours and hours on the internet I realized that there is no way I can afford a zoom telephoto lens of the quality that will justify putting it on a $1000 camera. So, instead I decided to purchase 135 f/2.8 soft focus. From the reports and the test shots I've seen it's very sharp. The soft focus can add a nice touch to portraits. And it's fast enough! Of course, I also ordered a 50mm 1.8 lens. So, now the weak point is wide angle, but I have a kit lens anyway, so I'll see how it performs.

[pradeep1]

After spending hours and hours on the internet I realized that there is no way I can afford a zoom telephoto lens of the quality that will justify putting it on a $1000 camera. So, instead I decided to purchase 135 f/2.8 soft focus. From the reports and the test shots I've seen it's very sharp. The soft focus can add a nice touch to portraits. And it's fast enough! Of course, I also ordered a 50mm 1.8 lens. So, now the weak point is wide angle, but I have a kit lens anyway, so I'll see how it performs.

Post some stuff when you get a chance. I'd like to see how it performs as well.

[Canuck]

I must say that I have trouble getting to grips with buyong an expensive camera and then put a cheap lens on it that is really low quality. Believe me, there are plenty of low quality lenses out there. I don't know how to put this other than you get what you pay for in lenses. I've seen what L glass is like, I have 2 of them, the 16-35mm and 24-70mm F2.8 lenses. I have also seen what Sigma EX lenses are capable of and have the 120-300 F2.8EX to that end. Alternatively, you might look at an F4 lens. There is the 28-70 F2.8EX lens for $330 or 24-70 F2.8 for $400 and 70-200 F2.8EX for $739 from B&H. Ok, this puts you just outside the $1K you wanted to spend, but you will may filters too. That will cover most focal lengths you need. Alternatively, there are a few other lenses int he Sigma EX family that should do you fine for landscape pics such as a 17-35 $489, or 20-40 $650, or even the 12-24mm $649 if you want to go superwide angle.
Just my two pence...

[msvadi]

Post some stuff when you get a chance. I'd like to see how it performs as well.

I posted a couple of snapshots taken with 135mm f/2.8 (with and without soft focus effect) here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28635&highlight=