Looking for a new lense, opinions ?

I mostly shoot still shots of cars, and I'm looking for a some what cheap but good lens. I'm a noob still so I don't no a lot about lens. So any input would be great.

For indoors car shots go with Sigma 30mm f/1.4 prime lens.. heard a lot of good things bout them

I don't shoot indoors, sorry did not no that matter.

canon 50mm 1.8, good and cheap.

Skrim17 wrote in post #2103714
canon 50mm 1.8, good and cheap.

It is cheap, but whether or not it is 'good' is entirely subject to what you would clasify as a 'good' lens.

I have an EF-S 10-22 and I would call that a 'good' lens. Whereas I would clasify my 70-200 2.8 IS L a 'great' lens. This would mean that in my opinion the 50 1.8 is relegated to being an 'average' lens.

90blackcrx wrote in post #2103693
I don't shoot indoors, sorry did not no that matter.

In that case I would opt for any wide angle lenses like the Sigma 10-20

Take a look at the shots you took with your kit lens. What setting were you mostly at? (it's in the EXIF). If you mostly shot around 50mm, get the 50/1.8, if you mostly shot at 18mm, the 50/1.8 would not be of much use

Cheap and good lenses are almost nonexistant.
Moderately priced and good lenses are easier to find.

Dont skimp on glass, even if it mean shooting with your only lens for another 6 months, save and get quality glass.

back to the topic... in your case, something along the lines of a 10-22 or 30mm 1.4 would be the best choice, assuming you have reasonable close access (talking rediculously close with 10-22 at it's widest)

cgratti wrote in post #2103924
Cheap and good lenses are almost nonexistant.
Moderately priced and good lenses are easier to find.

Dont skimp on glass, even if it mean shooting with your only lens for another 6 months, save and get quality glass.

I should not of used cheap, I just don't want to drop down $500 on a lens, specially when I just payed $600 for the camera.

I do shoot indoors but not of cars.

what focal lenghts do you usually shoot with currently? i think you can get the best bang for your buck if you buy a prime in your comfort focal length. if your comfort length is a variable range, it still might be better to buy a prime and adjust by taking a step forward/back. i'd suggest zooms only when you have little control over where you can stand to take your picture. primes will get the job done better unless you get wicked expensive glass that performs exceptionally at variable focal lenghts

as a side note, if you're on a budget and you can deal with adjusting your footing/distance from the car, i think the 50mm f1.8 should provide you with decent quality pictures without breaking the bank...IMO

Here was my last shoot
https://photography-on-the.net …php?t=225836&go​to=newpost

I like the 30mm 1.4 due to it's normal perspective. It is very close to what is in my field of view.

mizuno wrote in post #2103783
It is cheap, but whether or not it is 'good' is entirely subject to what you would clasify as a 'good' lens.

I have an EF-S 10-22 and I would call that a 'good' lens. Whereas I would clasify my 70-200 2.8 IS L a 'great' lens. This would mean that in my opinion the 50 1.8 is relegated to being an 'average' lens.

I bought the 50 1.8 because of all the ranting about how great it was for the money, and I was dissapointed. Cheap build quality, focusing problems as it seems, not great wide open, etc.

I think you need a zoom, not a prime - increased versatility traded off by a marginal loss of IQ that no one will notice anyway.

I'd suggest Sigma 17-70mm if on a budget ( who isn't...?) but if you can swing it Canon 17-40L is magic. I think a 50mm prime is WAY too long on a crop body. If you have to have a prime lens, anything 28-35mm will be fine. the sigma 10-20mm or the Canon 10-22mm are also worth a serious look.