Canon, Sigma, Tamron?

For the newbie SLR user (Rebel XT), am I wasting money on low end lenses like the Tamron 28-80 (under $50 on ebay), or are they worthwhile? I don't want to drop $400-600 on a lens until I really know what I'm doing, but I wonder if it's better to buy a few different low end lenses to play with, or just wait & get something nice.

Primarily for pics of the kids & outdoors, maybe some macros. Nothing professional.

Thanks!

Does it have to be a zoom lens? Can you use a standard FL which will have the same FOV as an 80mm on a FF or 35mm camera? If you can live with shooting at 50mm and want great IQ, then the Nifty at ~$60 is the way to go. 50mm f/1.8.

One of the things that I have noticed is that used lenses usually hold their value pretty well, so if and when you decide to upgrade you will get most of your money back to put towards a new lens! Can't afford to buy a 24-70 L right now so I'm buying a sigma for now instead and I may just end up keeping it.

I'm sure I'm not the most qualified person to answer this question, but I'll try.

There's been tremendous progress in lens technology with in the last 5-10 years, primarily, in my opinion, due to the digitization of the industry. Digital sensors require near perpendicular incidence of light to record images (silver halide was way too lenient). If you're using an older "film" lens with your digital camera you may notice more pronounced vignetting, barreling and chromatic aberration than on a film camera.

Jeff, are you completely new to photography? have you used a point and shoot before? If you are completely new, I would suggest either the original canon 18-55 kit lens, or preferably the new IS version, which runs 200 bucks. unless you think photography is a fleeting fancy and dont wanna drop any money on it.
You can buy a tamron 17-50 2.8 for around 350 used (just saw it on this board). If after 6 months you decide you dont like it, I will personally buy it of your for 300 bucks. How is that?

Yes the Cannon 18-55 EF-S is actually a pretty good lens! Sub $100 used.

shutterfiend wrote in post #3783173
I'm sure I'm not the most qualified person to answer this question, but I'll try.

There's been tremendous progress in lens technology with in the last 5-10 years, primarily, in my opinion, due to the digitization of the industry. Digital sensors require near perpendicular incidence of light to record images (silver halide was way too lenient). If you're using an older "film" lens with your digital camera you may notice more pronounced vignetting, barreling and chromatic aberration than on a film camera.

I've read that supposedly, digital sensors behave more like slide film stock rather than print film stock.

About retention value of lenses, I have personally observed that Canons, specifically the 'L' maintain their values rather well. In fact, during the rebate season and trying to look at craigslist for a used copy, the price difference between a used and a new lens after rebate was very little. With that said, however, the 3rd party lenses do not keep their value as well as the Canon. My observation.

Sigma 17-70 macro might fit your needs the best.

use the 18-55 kit lens and maybe pair it up with a used telezoom like the sigma 70-300 APO DG ($200) to figure out your needs, and then choose accordingly. the 50/1.8 prime may help you figure out your need for speed as well. if you buy them all used, you shouldn't spend more than $300 total

Tee Why, aren't those ~$300-400?

You would be better off with the kit lens, better known as the Canon 18-55 than with a $50 ebay lens. This will let you take a variety of pictures and is a fair piece of glass. sure a $400 lens will be better (and it should be) however the 18-55 will work fine.

By the way if you make an 8x10 print you will be hard pressed to tell the difference between the 18-55 kit lens and a high dollar one. The extra money buys you a wider wide aperture and other stuff that you wont really notice much at first.

Good luck!

just keep checking the for sale forum for kit lens

Good feedback everyone, thanks!

I am not new to photography, but new to Canon SLR. I've been shooting digital for quite some time with P&S and with Olympus "prosumer" SLR (C 2500-L & E-10), which had fixed lenses.

I do have the kit lens that I got with my XT which I like quite a bit, and I also plan on picking up a 50mm f/1.8, based on numerous recommendations. I'd like to also get something with some better range (200-300mm, maybe) and something for macros. Could they be the same lens?

I actually prefer to buy used; I've had quite a bit of luck with e-bay (got my XT kit w/2GB CF for $425).

Shutterfiend, you bring up a good point. Is there an easy way to tell which lenses are made for film vs. digital?

Lenses: www.eflens.com (all fit your body)
Image Quality evaluation (technical): http://www.the-digital-picture.com …105&Camera=9&Le​nsComp=410

In general, you'll get what you pay for. Follow links from the eflens site above to read reviews and comparisons, and pretty soon you'll be able to make a decision about the money.

Look into the Canon 75-300mm or the Sigma 70-200mm. If you want to do macro, you can easily get a set of extension tubes or a close up filter. You can find the lenses used on eBay for about $100-120.