One lens to rule them all...

[BigBlueDodge]

Okay, I've been bitten by the shutterbug. I will soon be the owner of a Canon 20D. I have talked my self into upgrading from the Nikon D70 that I was previous set on buying. Knowing that the kit lens in the Canon is not all that great, I would like to purchase a single high quality lens that will give me better quality than the kit lens, and be more usable than the 18-55mm.

I'm am not a professional photographer by any means, just some one who relishes high quality pictures of my family, and general life. My intended purpose with this camera is for portrait work, vacations, and general family snapshots. I don't have any need for nature photography, landscape, or sports. I simply plan to pester the hell out of my wife and 2 girls over the course of the next 5 years :D The key is that people will be 95% of the subjects that I will initially be shooting. However, I'm sure that as I get more and more into the hobby, I will probably expand on the types of things I shoot.

I've read through the Top 10 Lens thread and have decided that the Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5 IS USM is probably the best choice, based on feed back I have received on this thread. My target is $400 for the lens. I will admit that alot of this is above me and I rely on advice from others more in the know to help me out. For the price point, is there any better lens that fits my need that I should be considering ?

In the near future, as soon as I can afford it, I will be adding a EF 85 f/1.8 USM, based on all of the favorable input found in the Top 10 Portrait Lenses thread. I don't think, or should I say, I don't forsee myself needing a high zoom lense based on what I think I'll be shooting.

I *think* those two lens should cover my needs until I get more serious in the hobby. I would rather get 1 good lens than 2 cheap lenses. I've learned my lesson time and time again in other hobbies to just by the highest quality you can afford, even if it means you get less in quantity.

I'm sorry to post another newby "Which lens is the best" type question. I've read and read and read these posts and I'm still undecided. Thanks to all for your replies.

[Eric DeCastro]

I would just shoot with the kit lense and then decide to get a different lens. if you are only shooting yoru family with this lense you want, then the kit lense is more then enough. it has very sharp pictures. but I can tell you are new to the D/SLR world so I would get to know your camera and kit lense first and foremost. I have a good friend who can blow any anverage to above average photographer away with her kit lense. have a look see. http://laurenn.divinereverie.net/ word of advice, stay off the internet and spend more time with your camera, you will learn so much more with while shooting then you will asking questions. I have been shooting SLR since the early 90s and still to this day do not have enough time in a day to shoot enough.

don't waste yoru money on things you don't need. and if you insist on getting a lense in that range, get a tamron 28-75 di.

[BigBlueDodge]

Well, you are certainly correct in that I am new to all of this. I have decided that if I'm going down this path, that I will get the best that I can afford. No sense in trying to fight with inferior equipment. I had mixed feelings about the kit lens, and simply didn't feel that a $150 lens could do a $1500 camera justice. But I defer to the experts on this one. Thanks for your input.

[Eric DeCastro]

Well, you are certainly correct in that I am new to all of this. I have decided that if I'm going down this path, that I will get the best that I can afford. No sense in trying to fight with inferior equipment. I had mixed feelings about the kit lens, and simply didn't feel that a $150 lens could do a $1500 camera justice. But I defer to the experts on this one. Thanks for your input.

yeah i'm am pretty certain. I have been doing this long enough to be able to spot em. but if you think that the "$150" lense is beneth you, you might need to get a nikkon. ;)

[willg]

this is why i don't like the kit lens...this rainbow flare has got to go...i have heard a few things about it though some say its a lens flaw and all of them don't do it and some say its just life..anyway i can still take great pictures during the day with the kit and its the widest thing under $600 so i would say its worth it

http://uploads.jzl.us/files/rainbow.jpg

[Skip Souza]

Hi there BigBlue Dodge.

I sold my big blue Dodge almost two years ago. It was a great ride but the lease was up and I needed four doors. Bought a Mitsubishi Endeavor and love it. I do miss the truck though.
I am more of a long lens type of guy. Having said that I have a new found respect for my wife's kit lens. The secret is to use the lens within it's limitations. If you can keep the aperture at f/8 or tighter you will be rewarded with very good captures.
Only the very best (read expensive) lenses will handle shooting straight into powerful lights without problems.
For an example of what can be done see this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72916).
I don't think Canon would sabotage their $1,500 camera with a lens that was that bad. Not good marketing.

[antaine]

I have the Tamron 28-75 as my walkaround lense. It is great for portraits and I used it for landscape shots at the weekend and they came out pretty sharp . Colour also appear very good.
It is also not too heavy. (and don't forget the constant f2.8! if required)

[CyberDyneSystems]

Be sure and click the Sticky at the top of the forum labled "READ FIRST"... there you will find links to the -=TOP 10=- lens polls we conducted...

[Bill Ng]

The kit lens is too slow for portrait work. At 55mm, the max aperature is f/5.6 which leaves way too much depth of field and doesn't allow for enough shutter speed to utilize available light in most cases.

Is the kit lens a good lens for the $100 you spend on it .. yes. Is it a good amateur portrait lens, not at all.

You were definately on the correct path with the 85 1.8 My suggestion would be to add either the 50mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.2 as well ... the 50mm 1.8 being a gem of a lens for only $70 brand new.

I have a 50mm 1.8 portrait gallery you can check out here: http://www.pbase.com/bill_in_brooklyn/portraits

I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field so a fast lens (fast as in max aperature value, not as in fast focusing) is a must for me when thinking about portraits. Studio portrait work is considerably different but that's not what you are after so don't worry about it.

The 28-135 you list is an excellent all around lens for the money, a bit slow, but the IS makes up for that in ways you can't imagine if you've never worked with an IS lens before ... great choice.

Bill in Brooklyn

[COKE CAN]

the kit and its the widest thing under $600 so i would say its worth it



Tamron 17-35/2.8?

[ed2day]

Personally, unless you know there's features you require in the 20D I'd get the 300D and the 24-70L for the same price or less. Put your money in the lens--this one's perfect for your needs, it may be the only one you need, and it will keep you happy for the next 10 yrs at least. Plus it will maintain it's value while the value of the camera plummets. The picture quality will be superior to the combination you're looking at IMO. You'll find 28mm not wide enough(with 1.6 crop) for close-in group shots.

[BigBlueDodge]

Well, the camera was ordered from ButterFly photo today. Price was $1349. Doing more research on the lenses actually swayed me a bit from the Canon 28-135 USM IS to the Tamron 28-75 SP DI. However, there appears to be a national backorder on this lens. I tried several camera stores on line that advertised them from $349 - 369 and they said it would be a couple of weeks. Until then, I'll take the opportunity to get familiar with the "lowly" kit lens (:)) and camera. I have a buddy who has Canon 28-135 USM and 70-300 USM (not IS on either) that he is willing to lend to me indefinately in hopes that I will buy them from him.

I know this forums gets beaten down alot by noob questions such as mine, but I do appreciate all of your responses.

CyberDyne, I did take time to read the Top 10 forums not once, but twice before posting this question. I saw a general consensus in the Portrait lenses for the 50 mm and 85 mm f/1.8 lenses. However, the general purpose top 10 left me with more questions than went I went into it. The problem with those threads are that they are simply polls, and alot of additional information is not conveyed. I wanted to throw my situation out in front of every one and get some advice. The thread did help in that it helped me narrow down my search. However it didn't help me select the final lens, and that is where I need you guys.

Anyway, camera is supposed to be here by Friday. I'll get the whole weekend to play with it. In the mean time I plan on spending lots of time reading up on these threads, soaking in as much as I can.

BigBlueDodge

[BigBlueDodge]

Personally, unless you know there's features you require in the 20D I'd get the 300D and the 24-70L for the same price or less. Put your money in the lens--this one's perfect for your needs, it may be the only one you need, and it will keep you happy for the next 10 yrs at least. Plus it will maintain it's value while the value of the camera plummets. The picture quality will be superior to the combination you're looking at IMO. You'll find 28mm not wide enough(with 1.6 crop) for close-in group shots.

ed2day,

the 20D is most definately too much camera for me right now. But it is there for me to grow into. With the 300D, I didn't want to invest in a camera, and then 1 year later decide that I need a much more capable setup and lose $700. I'd rather take the hit up front and get more than I need, initially, rather than get something I might outgrow in 1 year. Hopefully this is the right decision. Only time will tell