Beginner Lens Help (35mm)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by marioman38, Feb 13, 2007.

  1. marioman38 macrumors 6502a


    Aug 8, 2006
    Elk Grove, CA
    Well, im a 9th grader beginning photo II, and i just purchased a Canon K2 Body only for $52 off ebay...

    I currently have a Rebel 2000 with a dying lens (makes weird squeeks when auto focus is used)

    "Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-80mm 1:3.5-5.6 II"

    I would like to know of a lens for the K2 that is a "few steps up" from a reliable brand that can be found (ebay/craigslist) for <$100

    Thanks Everyone...

    Edit: I guess i generally shoot nature photos (lakes, rivers, waterfalls, mountains, plants etc.) and i would prefer a faster lens, if possible acording to price...
  2. shieldyoureyes macrumors 6502


    Nov 1, 2005
    Uppsala, Sweden
  3. hodgjy macrumors 6502

    Apr 15, 2005
    Canon 50 f/1.8 is $75 new.
    Canon 35 f/2 is ~$150 used.

    Both are great lenses and will be perfect for learning photography.
  4. mrkramer macrumors 603


    Jul 11, 2006
    I would go with a 50mm or if Canon makes a wide angle lens that is fast enough and in your price range that may be good for nature photography.
  5. joepunk macrumors 68030


    Aug 5, 2004
    a profane existence
    I would go with a 50mm lense for the moment. If you get a 35mm and still are taking landscape shots you will be wanting something wider like 24mm, well I do anyway.
  6. failsafe1 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 21, 2003
    A fast 50 with an f stop of 1.8 or 2 would fit the bill.
  7. Abstract macrumors Penryn


    Dec 27, 2002
    Location Location Location
    You all suggest a 50 mm lens for landscapes?

    How good was that 28-80 mm range? Did it let you shoot what you want? If I were you, I'd try to find something similar to that range. How much is a used Canon 24-85 mm f/3.5 - 4.5 in America?? I'm not sure about Canon lenses or US pricing, but I think it'd be more than $100, which is the problem.

    The 50 mm f/1.8 is a nice lens, but not for landscapes.
  8. marioman38 thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Aug 8, 2006
    Elk Grove, CA
    Thanks For The input guys...

    So should i stick with a canon lens then, or would a Quantaray lens be reliable???

    I do think i 'd like a zoom lens as I would like to zoom up on things to create more abstract photos...

    I've got my eye on a Quantaray 28-200 mm f/3.8-5.6 and a Canon 28-90mm 1:4-5.6 III.... As the 28-80 has done quite well, and both lens can be set to 50mm as many have suggested...

    Both of these i assume are around $100 which is more than i wanted to spend, but i would if its good enough...

    Thank You All...
  9. Karpfish macrumors 6502a


    Sep 24, 2006
    you cant expect to get anything decently fast with a good range(if its a zoom) for 100 bucks let alone less than that. They weren't saying try shooting at 50mm, they were saying that a 50 1.8 is like 80 bucks, which is very fast and a good normal range. Go for the 50.
  10. sjl macrumors 6502


    Sep 15, 2004
    Melbourne, Australia
    If it's between those two, I'd stick with Canon. Sigma makes some good glass (and some duds, but everybody has at least one dud in their lineup), but I've never heard anything good said about Quantaray.

    The reason so many people are suggesting the 50mm f/1.8 is that it's a very cheap lens, a very fast lens, and produces excellent shots - 50mm is the one point where these three attributes coincide. No, it's not a zoom lens, but when it comes to lens design, that's an asset - there are compromises inherent in designing a zoom lens, meaning a prime (non-zoom) lens will be cheaper and better quality than an equivalent zoom.

    For the price you're talking about, the 50mm f/1.8 is the only realistic option. You might want to go wider than that (35mm or maybe 24mm spring to mind), but good quality lenses at that sort of focal length will cost more than you're indicating as your budget.

Share This Page