Photojournalism Lens on the cheap?

Statement wrote in post #2035641
Well it seems the two highest supported are the 24-70L or the 28-75 tamron. I wish I could somehow try them both out.

Well if your pricerange is capped at $500 you don't have to bother trying the 24-70L.

Statement wrote in post #2035641
Well it seems the two highest supported are the 24-70L or the 28-75 tamron. I wish I could somehow try them both out.

thats on full frame

28mm is not nearly enough for dramatic stuff on you rebel.

For photojournalism the stadard setup is 16-35 and 70-200 plus a flash.

Considering budget constraints, I'd pick up an 18-55 and a flash. It's a perfectly fine lens to be used outside, especially if you want a flash fill. Inside you'll need to take the flash off camera to get something decent.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #2035698
thats on full frame

28mm is not nearly enough for dramatic stuff on you rebel.

For photojournalism the stadard setup is 16-35 and 70-200 plus a flash.

Bingo. With a 17-40 and a 70-200, I really don't feel a need for much else. I mean, I could always use longer and faster, but it's not pressing at all, nor do I find myself wishing I had it.

The 28-75 is a great lens, but on a rebel or any body that crops, I dont think 28 will be nearly wide enough for your needs. How come nobody has mentioned the Tammy 17-50? I dont own it, but from what i've read it seems like it would be a good option to consider. Much faster than the Canon 17-40, and with an extra 10mm too!

Have you considered any of the lenses in the 17-50mm-ish range? You're also dealing with a crop factor, so 28mm is going to be a pretty far reach. And often enough, I've found that 24mm just isnt wide enough. Constant 2.8 may also help out in low light situations later on. I believe Tamron and Sigma both make a lense in this range that fits your financial requirements.

I really don't understand crop factor. Can someone link me to somewhere where I can read about it? The 17-85 IS seems like a great for me, but now everyone's talking about crop factor. What will it do to the images?

Statement wrote in post #2042253
I really don't understand crop factor. Can someone link me to somewhere where I can read about it? The 17-85 IS seems like a great for me, but now everyone's talking about crop factor. What will it do to the images?

Very simply, it means that the image sensor is smaller than a piece of 35mm film, therefore, lenses, which have standardized focal lengths, will effectivly be longer on a cropped sensor. To derive how long a lens will be equivlent to, simply multiply the stated length by 1.6. Therefore, 17mm is rougly equiv. to 28mm, and 28mm is right around 44mm, and 50mm falls around 85, and so on. In general, a normal wide lens on a 35mm camera has a focal length of about 28mm, in order to get this on a 1.6 crop camera, you need to use lense that begins at 17mm. What people are saying is that a 28mm lens is wide on film, but not at all on digital, therefore, you might not want to look at something like the Sigma 28-75 simply because it won't be wide enough.

Statement wrote in post #2033382
I was wondering if any of you have a specific recommendation for a budget beginner's photojournalism lens. Here's a few things about what I am looking for:

I am about to start shooting for my school's newspaper, so I will probably be doing pictures of all types of events. That being said, all I have right now is a 50mm 1.8. I will ideally want a zoom lens, but one that goes down to as low of an angle as possible. This is because today I noticed that I really wish I had a wider angled lens, for things that are in closer proximity. Obviously the other end is that I want the zoom for the furthur things. IS is obviously a big plus, like the 17-85 (something I looked into).

But ideally the pricerange (For used, definitely) would be up to $500 (US). Are my requests reasonable? Do you have a good idea of a lens that fits these purposes?

Thanks for the help.

tamron 17-50. you need a fast, wide lens. you can always crop and you need to be able to shoot in available light.

ed rader