Recommendation on 2nd lense?

[hank1105]

I just got the Canon EOS Rebel, so far I am extremely happy with this camera. I purchased the kit with the 18mm-55mm lense. In using the lense I find that I need the ability to zoom in even more. Can anyone recommend a lense that isn't high in price and give me good zoom ability? I apologize for being such a noob, I am still trying to understand the various f stop levels, shutter speeds and film speeds.

Thanks.

Hank

[mttmrphy]

What price range are you talking? Lots of options...

[Scottes]

How much do you want to zoom? Or what is it that you wish to shoot?

How much do you want to spend?

Canon 70-200 f/4 and the Canon 28-135 IS may be likely candidates. They're often the second lens people buy it seems, and they're great lenses without spending a fortune.

[sheldon]

I have the 70-200 f/4 and LOVE it. Its an awsome lens, at an awsome price ($580.00 at B&H)

[mttmrphy]

I'm selling my 75-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM if you are looking to go cheap.

[hank1105]

Good questions, mostly shooting people, like street acts and things like that, however I can't always get as close as I want. Budget wise I was thinking of something around 300 bucks, still new to this hobby so I don't want to go overboard to quickly, although 300 bucks most likely isn't overboard. Thanks for any help.

Hank

[Haifidelity]

Try the 28-135 IS. It's probably exactly what you're looking for at your price range. The IS will help you more with low light than f/2.8 would (I should know with the 28-70 F/2.8L).

If you want utmost quality, try the EF 85mm F/1.8 or EF 100mm F/2.8 Macro. These are in the 300-450 price range and can give you superalative quality and speed over just about any standard/telephoto zoom in that price range.

[khiromu]

It is kind of tough to find a good zoom lens in that budget, but one I can recommend is old 100-300/5.6L. If you are lucky, you can find it below $300. It is a little bit slow at f/5.6, it is old, push-pull zoom, but the optics seems to be very good. If you don't care about those cons, I would recommend it over anything in 75-300 range by Canon.

[hank1105]

Thanks for the replies. When people state that the lense is slow, not to sound like an ass, but what does that mean exactly and what is the measurement f/5.6? Thanks for help.

Hank

[Jon]

f/ 5.6 is "slow". The f/ stop (f/5.6 in this case) is a ratio of the focal length and the maximum diameter of the aperture, so it's a measure of how well the lens collects light. A slow lens won't collect as much light as a faster one, so you need to use a slower shutter speed (which is more likely to let you see camera shake). The 28-70 f/2.8 is "faster" by 2 f/stops (which means that you can use a shutter speed that's 1/4 what the f/5.6 would need in the same light). The 28-135 offers "Image Stabilization", where the lens adjusts for your unsteadiness (which we all have) so slower speeds don't show as much shake.

[hank1105]

Jon,

Thanks for the information. I am definitely going to hit up Barnes and Noble soon to look at some photography books. I definitely want to figureo out f stops, iso levels and shutter speeds.

Hank

[Mitch]

There is only one answer to your question: the 28-135 IS USM. It is the perfect lens for people shots. It will often give you the same quality as the L glass if you reasonably control your lighting, correct aperture selection and exposure. I use it deliberately instead of the 24-70 and the 70-200. I have the 70-200L f4. I love it. It's fantastic, but I never pull it out of the bag at a wedding. I want to, but I wind up never pulling it out of the bag because the 28-135 handles everything I need.

Just a quick note. Don't shoot portraits below f5.6. Stay around f8 for most all of your portrait shots at a wedding. Try it, 97% of all your shots will come out crystalline sharp. With a 10D, don't be afraid to use ISO above 100 if you need the extra light, but try not to go to or exceed ISO 800 unless you have no choice. At weddings, sharp is what you want.