| Author |
Message |
|
|
#1442 2007-12-20 21:29 GMT |
Hi all,
I have always have trouble when it comes to buying new lens. I currently own a Canon 400D with the lens kit (18-55mm: 3.5-5.6)and 70-200mm f4 but I feel that the I have use the kit lens to its maximum and was considering buying a 17-55mm f2.8 IS and/or 10-22mm. Could anybody help me decide or recommend any lens?
I am not specialize in anything as I tend take photo of everything I see but I am trying to get into landscape photography at the moment.
Thank you in advance.
|
|
|
|
#1444 2007-12-21 00:30 GMT |
Canon have a new version of the 18-55 that also has IS and is optically superior to the version you have.It is also a lot cheaper than the 17-55mm 2.8 IS which you mention. I use the Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 on my 400d which is an excellent lens with the added bonus of macro capability. May I ask in what way you do you feel limited by your 18-55, is it minimum aperture or range?
|
|
|
|
#1445 2007-12-21 12:03 GMT |
Thank you davles for your reply. I might have confused myself with the figuers. ie 17-55 and 18-55 as it has the same aperture and IS. So which one is it that I hear people talk about the most?
You are very correct, I feel that the aperture of the lens kit is some what limited. That is my main reason. Don't get me wrong, it is a very good for a kit lens but sometimes I don't really want to be carrying my tripod and I rely on the IS and the aperture setting. Sigma 17-70 sounds interesting. I might go do some research on that. Which one of the picture that you posted were taken with that lens?
Thank you again.
|
|
|
|
#1448 2007-12-21 15:42 GMT |
Above the blue lagoon was taken with the sigma 17-70 among others. Some of the pictures were taken with the 18-55 kit lens that you have.I have never bought expensive lenses because the optical differences between them and the consumer grade lenses are not that great once you stop down to F8 or F11 which is were you should be for landscape shots.I also shoot raw only and convert the images using Canon's Digital Photo Professional software that is supplied with the camera.
|
|
|
|
#1450 2007-12-21 23:31 GMT |
Lenses choise is very individual, depends what you want to do with them. I can not 100% agree with daves about quality, but it is true that the best sharpness you have in close up apperture. There are a lot of sits about some individual lenses. Difficult to advice. I can mention several different dimention. It looks that you are looking for fisheye? If it is so - there is such lense as Peleng 8mm f5.6, it is around $300 and full blown circular fish, it would not give 180 degree on your sensore, but is still very wide. If you want to make scenary picture - Panorama is very reasonable alternative to expensive glasses, PTGui soft is around $90, and can increase significantly resolution of your picture. If you do not need fast AF and can tolerate it noisy - Soligore 70-210, f2.8 macro AF- is a great lense, very sharp and relatively light, you can buy it on ebay for $200. (old lense). 70-200 f4 canon is one of the sharpest gays in the company, but I did back to back comparisone with soligore - not too much of difference, and 2.8 and macro and price - are bonus. When I look now on the pictures that I did by 18-55 - I want to pinch myself for thriftiness, have to discard it ASA bought it, but this is my opinion. For the choice of the lenses - you have to understand how professional you want you pictures look, and what kind of damage you can tolerate, mostly the more expencive - the better, but not in all the cases, and buying expencive glass - you have to change your habbits - tripod all the time, cable release, low ASA, good light - otherwise would not be any difference.
|
|
|
|
#1451 2007-12-22 05:18 GMT |
AndreyG,I am curious,what exactly do you not agree with regarding image quality differences between consumer grade lenses and the professional grade lenses such as the Canon L series.Moniqhaha, I have owned two copies of the kit lens the first was not that great at the corners of the frame but the second one was very good.I bought the sigma for the added range, build quality,handling and of course the optical quality which is sharper throughout the zoom range and at all apertures.It also displays very little chromatic aberration unlike the canon kit lens which is poor in terms of CA, build quality and manual focusing capabilities. That said I have made exhibition quality 15x10 inch prints from both the kit lens and the Sigma.Incidentally could you tell me what size do you intend to print at?
Regards,Les.
|
|
|
|
#1452 2007-12-22 09:42 GMT |
It is not what the size of the print, - it is about crispinness of the details, there are number of lines on mm that the glass can transforme to the sensor, there is a number of lines on mm that the sensor can transform to the card (the size of the pixel), and I rather keep them filled up. Reasonable print suppose to withstand 10X magnification - it gives you the feeling of crisspenness and natural look. Again you can print posters from anything, and they will look reasonably good, but you can not see the leaves on the tree, blurred. Grass will be not blades, but the green mass. Color aberrations is something that I can correct, but blurr and doubling - can not, but those small details make a big difference when you look on the pictures. Again, you can make art by almost everything, and I use cellphone now for some kind of portraits, but I really do not want to look on my 18-55 images, after I got 16-35 canon. Some of them are fraimed good, nice colors, but no feeling of prsence in the scenary. It really depends on the way how you look on your picture and how you want to present them. Opinions could be different.
|
|
|
|
#1457 2007-12-27 09:06 GMT |
Thanks everyone for the replies. There is still so much I need to research. I will keep all these as reference. 
|
|
|
|
#1614 2008-03-27 19:26 GMT |
Im using a 400D as well and i have what i consider the 2 best lenses and probably the only lenses i need. I have a Canon 70-200 2.8 and the lens i think you should get - the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L series - its absolutely awesome. perfect picture quality and colour - also good for a range of styles.
If you would like to have a squizz this is where i decide on my lenses - the reviews are great and you have over 50 people on each lens voting so check it out.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/best_canon_eos_lenses.html
"Time goes on, things change from moment to moment, and a photo is all that remains of the moment past..."
mbaker.com.au |
|
|
|
#1621 2008-03-28 22:04 GMT |
another 5 cents - 70-200 2.8 is an excellent instrument, but the price and weight of the lens are the subject to think about. 70-200 f4 is of the same, may be superior, sharpness, but it priced 1/2 of 2.8 and 1/2 of the weight. When you use it on more then 100mm DOF on 2.8 is very shallow specially with the crop factor, so no (at least for me) a necessity for it. I had both, but sold 2.8 - too heavy.
|
|
