What lens to get? [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

chriswisc

23rd of April 2005 (Sat), 20:54

Hi, I just purchased the 20D and currently have a quarantay 75-300mm lens that came with my old 35mm camera. On occasion, error 99 is displayed after I take a photo. Canon told me it was probably the lens which I agree. I can switch from my Canon lens back to my Quarantay and it works fine.....but too frustrating to keep.

I am considering purchasing a Canon 75-300mm lens. Are there different levels of Canon lens in this size? Any recommendations? Thanks in advance!

cactusclay

23rd of April 2005 (Sat), 21:17

How much to spend?

ron chappel

23rd of April 2005 (Sat), 21:40

Yep that Quanteray is made by sigma which have problems with canon cameras sometimes (usually old lenses on the newest cameras)

The canon 75-300 is no big step up optically (all canon 75-300's are the same in image quality by the way).
It will be a bit better but there are better telezooms around such as the Canon 100-300 usm or the Sigma 70-300 Apo macro super II

Do a search on this website-there have been some excellent post just recently on this subject,including a very good one where alot of users showed just what could be done with the 75-300.I'll try to find that one

tim

23rd of April 2005 (Sat), 21:42

Have a read of this (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56752).

dharris

24th of April 2005 (Sun), 08:07

Want a nice little zoom for not much money? Have a look at the 70-200mm F/4 L.
Trust me, as well as many other photographers, it's a very nice lens.

DocFrankenstein

24th of April 2005 (Sun), 09:34

Want a nice little zoom for not much money? Have a look at the 70-200mm F/4 L.
Trust me, as well as many other photographers, it's a very nice lens.
Yay to that

johneo

24th of April 2005 (Sun), 10:30

I am considering purchasing a Canon 75-300mm lens.

Not a bad lense, not a good lens ... pretty mediocre!

As suggested, spend a little more and get the 70-200 f/4 L. You'll lose a little on the zoom but the gain in quality (both in the lens and results) is huge. If you need the extra zoom you can always get a TC.

Now, if you have a lot of extra money ... I suggest the 100-400 L !!!!!!!

hamm3r

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 09:44

I read the "favorite Portrait Lens" FAQ and have a question:

Many people recommend the EF50mm (both the f/1.8 and f/1.4). I am curious if this lens would still be recommended as a starter lens if we already own the kit lens (EF-S 18-55mm).

I am a beginner looking to do portraits and like the $69 price tag of the 50 f/1.8, but wouldn't want to have two lenses for the same purpose.

Andy_T

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 10:03

I am a beginner looking to do portraits and like the $69 price tag of the 50 f/1.8, but wouldn't want to have two lenses for the same purpose.
[/size][/font]

Hamm,

welcome to the forum :D

Just some advice ... read up a bit on portrait photography and aperture:wink:

There is no way that a 50/1.8 and a 50/5.6 lens can be described as 'serving the same purpose'.

Best regards,
Andy

raylks

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 10:05

Did you need a wide-angle lens? 17-40mm L is a very value L wide angle lens.

smittymike19

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 10:11

Hamm,

welcome to the forum :D

Just some advice ... read up a bit on portrait photography and aperture:wink:

There is no way that a 50/1.8 and a 50/5.6 lens can be described as 'serving the same purpose'.

Best regards,
Andy

i concur

hamm3r

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 10:59

Thanks. I have done a ton of reading already, but there's so much to take in at once!
I didn't realize that the aperture changes at each end of the zoom. So I thought I was more at the 50/1.3 level. Now I realize that the f/1.3 is only at 18mm.

Does the 50/1.8 buy me anything more than allowing me more light so I can take pictures in darker settings? If I am using flash photography, does it make much of a difference?

nitsch

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:02

Does the 50/1.8 buying me anything more than allowing me more light so I can take pictures in darker settings?

The larger aperture will also allow you more contol over the depth of field (to get those nice blurred backgrounds).

Andy_T

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:10

Hamm,

the kit lens is not 1:1.3, it is 1:3.5 at the wide end and 1:5.6 on the long end.

The difference between 2 stops basically means that you get twice the amount of light through the lens.

Full stops are 1-1.4-2.0-2.8-4.0-5.6-8-11-16-22-32 (every figure multiplied by 1.4, which is the square root of 2)

So a 1:1.8 lens will allow approximately 4 times as much light as a 1:3.5 lens and 8 times as much light as a 1:5.6 lens :shock:

This means the difference between 1/15 and 1/100 of a second, quite a different thing to hand-hold.

But ... more important for portrait application is DOF (depth-of-field) control ... the ability to throw the part of the image that is not your main subject out of focus. You can use it to isolate your subject from the background.

>> Here << (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=65115) is a thread with good examples (and great pictures), taken mainly with the 50/1.8.

Hehe ... if you have a bit more money to spare, you might look at the pictures in this thread :lol: (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=515263)

Best regards,
Andy

hamm3r

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:18

Thanks folks! It's much clearer now! :D

hamm3r

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:25

DocFrankenstein

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:36

At the risk of asking too many questions:

Does purchasing the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens over the 1.8 for an extra $250 offer bang for the buck? I would be willing to go for the 1.4 but not if it doesn't buy me much.
For portraits you'd want the 1.4

1.8 has only a five blade diaphragm while the 1.4 has 8 blades. Thus the bokeh (out of focus areas) are rendered much better in the 1.4 lens.

More about it here:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=69785
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=50631&highlight=crappy+bokeh
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=53956&highlight=1.8+bokeh

If I could afford it, I'd get the 50/1.4 in a heartbeat.

Cheers

Andy_T

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 11:41

Take a look at this test (http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/ef50/).

I asked myself the same question.
I WANTED the 50/1.4.

Still, I went with a used 50/1.8 MKI instead.
(bought used from reputable camera dealer on eBay for $ 100)
Same as the 50/1.8 MKII, but with a metal lens mount and better build.

Will have to do until I have my 70-200/2.8 L, 135/2.0 L, 17-40/4.0 L, 85/1.8 and all the other lenses I want to get before upgrading my 50/1.8 to get the last 10% here.

So it comes down to 'It's YOUR decision' :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

hamm3r

25th of April 2005 (Mon), 12:05

Wonderful! You are excellent! I went for the 1.4. Two day shipping. Can't wait! I am going to miss the zoom feature though :(

Andy_T

7th of September 2005 (Wed), 13:10

I asked myself the same question.
I WANTED the 50/1.4.

Still, I went with a used 50/1.8 MKI instead.
(bought used from reputable camera dealer on eBay for $ 100)
Same as the 50/1.8 MKII, but with a metal lens mount and better build.

Will have to do until I have my 70-200/2.8 L, 135/2.0 L, 17-40/4.0 L, 85/1.8 and all the other lenses I want to get before upgrading my 50/1.8 to get the last 10% here.

Haha ... yes, that was my initial decision.

Suffice to say that the 50/1.4 and the 28/1.8 arrived before the 80-200/2.8 L :wink:
While I really liked the 50/1.8 MKI, the bokeh was the reason for me to upgrade. I love the 50/1.4.

Best regards,
Andy

PS: Yes, I know, citing yourself does not exactly speak for your state of mind. But in this case :wink: