The_Camera_Poser
26th of June 2007 (Tue), 06:11
Hi all,
I'm back to wondering about lenses. Here's the situation: We've got a 30D with a 24-105 glued to it, and a 350 D that gets a range of lenses on it (see the variety in my signature). Anyhow, I've been contemplating replacing the kit lens with a Tamron 17-50, adding a Sigma 150 macro, and a Speedlite or sigma super light. I want to have a good walk-around lens for the 350D, something wider than the 24-105. BUT, after once again going through the Kit lens archive, I'm not so sure I want to replace this lens. I'm a pretty rank amateur (my wife is the expert), so it's not like I'm getting professional shots anyhow. Also, I really only wanted the 17-24 range covered- I'm not a fan of ultra-wides, but 24 is a bit too long. Anyhow, I've not been real happy with my pics taken with the kit lens, and I really like the ones taken with the 24-105L, but I think this is due to the IS, more than anything else.
No way I'd spend the money on the 17-55 IS.
I'll mostly be shooting landscapes with this lens.
SO- question is- in my position- spend the money of a Tamron, or keep the kit lens, get better with it, and use the money elsewhere, such as on a 30 prime, a x1.4 teleconverter (we do alot of wildlife/animal shots), or something else?
NEXT question is- how do you get such sharp pics with the kit lens? Stopping down? Tripods? Particularly at the wide ranges.
Thanks all!
I'm back to wondering about lenses. Here's the situation: We've got a 30D with a 24-105 glued to it, and a 350 D that gets a range of lenses on it (see the variety in my signature). Anyhow, I've been contemplating replacing the kit lens with a Tamron 17-50, adding a Sigma 150 macro, and a Speedlite or sigma super light. I want to have a good walk-around lens for the 350D, something wider than the 24-105. BUT, after once again going through the Kit lens archive, I'm not so sure I want to replace this lens. I'm a pretty rank amateur (my wife is the expert), so it's not like I'm getting professional shots anyhow. Also, I really only wanted the 17-24 range covered- I'm not a fan of ultra-wides, but 24 is a bit too long. Anyhow, I've not been real happy with my pics taken with the kit lens, and I really like the ones taken with the 24-105L, but I think this is due to the IS, more than anything else.
No way I'd spend the money on the 17-55 IS.
I'll mostly be shooting landscapes with this lens.
SO- question is- in my position- spend the money of a Tamron, or keep the kit lens, get better with it, and use the money elsewhere, such as on a 30 prime, a x1.4 teleconverter (we do alot of wildlife/animal shots), or something else?
NEXT question is- how do you get such sharp pics with the kit lens? Stopping down? Tripods? Particularly at the wide ranges.
Thanks all!