Cheap, decent quality lenses

I recently received my 400d and I'm loving it. I'm looking ahead now though, and I'd like to get another lens or two in the near future. I come from a Nikon 35mm SLR, and kinda miss the 70-300mm on that.

I can't afford Canon EF-S/EF lenses, I'm a broke student!

Ideally I'd like a decent, fairly quick (nothing special) telephoto, and a good lens for wide-angle work. I've been looking at Sigma lenses, but I'm not sure how well they stand up in practice.

If possible, both lenses should be around £100, so I'm not expecting L quality.

I've been looking a bit at these following lenses:
http://www.cameraking.​co.uk …r%20Canon&subca​t_code=219
http://www.cameraking.​co.uk …r%20Canon&subca​t_code=219
http://www.cameraking.​co.uk …r%20Canon&subca​t_code=219


Any ideas?

Ideas? always plenty. First up, use and learn to appreciate the much maligned kit lens. It goes pretty wide, being the FOV equivalent of 28mm at the wide end. You will get NOTHING better value than this lens. spending a bit of cash, I'd suggest the Sigma 17-70 as the best multi purpose replacement for the kit lens - though this lens is not L priced, it isn't exactly free either.

Secondly, your medium telephoto - I'd suggest the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG macro - it has pretty good image quality at ma great price, and is well worth the extra money over the non-APO version. It also has a 1:2 macro ratio which is pretty darn good. If that is too expensive for you then there is pretty much just the Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di LD macro - it matched the Sigma APO optically but build is less smart, and it has a 62mm filter thread so filters cost a bit more.

There really is nothing else at budget prices, unless you start looking at used lenses - avoid feeBay as you will pay a premium there and have little control over the sale.

You might want to consider a super zoom - the Tamron 18-200 and the Sigma 18-200 - but these do come with compromises and really IMO are better thought of as travel lenses.

The final bit of advice for anyone wanting a good, cheap lens is to get yourself the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 mark II lens - it costs very little, about £70 - and is wonderfully sharp with good image quality.

Ah, I've just looked at your links, seems you are being quite enterprising anyway!
First up the sigma 70-300 you link to is not the APO version, hence it is a fair bit cheaper. It's not rubbish, but if you are looking in that range the Tamron is better quality. Jessops are/ were offering the Tamron at £90 if you bought a new DSLR - maybe this might help?

As far as the Tamron and tokina 19-35mm lenses - well, they are OK ish, but really are pretty ordinary and optically are no better than the kit lens. given that they start longer and end shorter than the kit lens, I would be interested in neither. these two lenses were really designed as 'ultra wide' for a decent price, for film cameras. they have nothing to offer you over the kit lens.

Do you actually have a kit lens? If not try pick one up on ebay - £40-£60 depending on luck - or perhaps look at the buy/sell boards here. there's always some L struck person off-loading a good kit lens!

Aye, I've been using the kit lens and I've found it a very versatile lens, I have no qualms with it at all (especially seeing as how it only cost £30 more to get the body with the kit lens, rather than just the body).

What's the difference between the APO and non-APO? I don't mind shelling out the extra £60 or so if it proves to be a good bonus.

Would a 70-300 or 18-200 be more useful overall? I'm mostly taking landscape, portrait, and architectural photos. Never had the opportunity to use an 18-200 lens myself.

And I have seen, and do plan on getting the 50mm mkII lens, as it seems like a superb lens for the price.

Thanks for the good reply!

Primes. My three EF primes are fast and very cheap. Excellent quality too.

Like the first response said, look into tamron and sigma lenses, they sacrifice some build quality and autofocus speed but the IQ is pretty solid.

Aye, I'm looking into those two makes, as I have heard many good things about them. AF speed doesn't matter too much when shooting landscapes and buildings. Besides, I'm a student - we have loads of spare time.

Ideally I'd like each lens to be under £150 at the most, as I'll probably need a new bag should I grab another lens (currently using an old Billingham bag that only fits camera+lens)

Currently I'm leaning towards buying a 50mm mkII and a new bag first (it's so affordable that there's really no point not to have it - especially for portrait work).

But after that I'd quite like a 70-300mm methinks, but I can't seem to find any information on what the APO feature does that makes it £60 more.

APO means apochromatic - it handles distortions and colour abberations better than non APO glass. Hence higher IQ, the idea is to focus ( ie refract) the three primary colours to the same focal point - and this minimises colour fringing, or chromatic abberation. I'm no physicist so allow some leeway in my explanations.

IMO it's worth the extra cash. cheap crap will be that forever, but you will get a lot of mileage from the APO version.

As far as the super zooms go, they bring sacrifices with them, and most people feel you are better off covering the range with 2-3 smaller range good quality lenses. about the only place they come into their own is as travel lenses.

kit lens, thrifty 50 and a 70-300 will give you great verstility. throw in some macro tubes from Jessops and you'll be away!

Throlkim wrote in post #2277982
Currently I'm leaning towards buying a 50mm mkII and a new bag first (it's so affordable that there's really no point not to have it - especially for portrait work).

But after that I'd quite like a 70-300mm methinks, but I can't seem to find any information on what the APO feature does that makes it £60 more.

I hope I answered your APO query adequately. I'm a big fan of the one-lens-at-a-time concept due to my own constraints but also it makes it easier to be sure you are getting the right lens!

The 50 is a great first extra lens, it is not built well but that doesn't matter at all. you will be amazed at how tiny it is, and the sharpness is amazing. It's a good portrait lens.

Regarding bags, there is a whole bunch of threads about that in the accessories section. ?no one bag can do everything, but either a medium sized rucksack like the Lowepro mini trekker, or a shoulder bag ( again I like Lowepro) of the Stealth reporter type are pretty good. I also have a slingshot 200 but I've gone off it as carrying weight just on one shoulder gets unpleasant.

Excellent, thanks for the advice - it seems affordable to me.
I'm very used to carrying a lot of weight on one shoulder, so no problem with the slingshot bags. I would ideally like a bag that can securely hold a tripod/umbrella though (for lazy rain photography ). Lowepro do make great quality bags, and I especially like the AW covers.
And one final quick question: lens hoods for the kit lens; do they exist, and if so, in petal form?

The Canon kit lens hood is completely and utterly useless and costs about £18. It is a thin rim of plastic that doesn't shade the lens and is too small to protect the lens either. I'd suggest get a 58mm diameter rubber folding lens hood from Jessops for about a fiver. If you have to have one. I don't bother.
My L lenses came with good hoods ( well, except the 17-40 - that hood is fairly inadequate) and Sigma lenses come with hoods - another bonus , also Tammies do too. It's just Canon that makes you pay extra for consumer lens hoods!

IMO the biggest drawback to the Slingshot series is that point where your collection has grown enough to make the bag heavy - it's also hard to fill is sensibly and still be able to get stuff out of it. I like the bag well enough but don't overload it, and don't expect it to be as easy as implied to get things in and out of it!

The main reason I wanted a hood was just to keep the rain off the lens (it rains far too much here -_-). I'll give the rubber hood a try, can't really be too bad for a fiver.

I'm still looking into bags, might well go with a shoulder bag with room to expand.

Thanks very much for all the help!

No worries, POTN is a good place. there is a huge amount of expertise and advice available here, and it is an excellent place to learn, not just about equipment but alkso technique and all the computer side of things.

I'd also suggest investing in a couple of the excellent photography mags - my favourites are digital Photo and practical photography, but I also like photography monthly, digital camera and a new one just out called Digital SLR Photography has just caught my fancy. I also subscrinbe to eos magazine as a good way to keep up with developments in the Eos system, and they have excellent how-to articles regarding using the cameras to best potential.

I realised I was buying too many mags each month - book shelf is full - so am trying to keep it to two a month....

Hehe, I'll definitely look into a few of those. I often find myself buying Outdoor Photographer, mostly because of the brilliant landscape work in there.

I'm absolutely in love with the EOS system, and the 400D has to be the easiest to learn camera I have ever owned. I much prefer the design and system to that of Nikon. I may well subscribe to the EOS magazine too, as I believe I had an offer card somewhere in the box...