Lense Recommendations

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MT37, Nov 19, 2006.

  1. MT37 macrumors regular

    MT37

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    Oshawa, ON, CA
    #1
    Well I want to get two more lenses for my Rebel. I want a better zoom lense, and a good fisheye lense. But for the fisheye, I searched google, but didn't come up with many. I found adapters, but I wouldn't mind a whole lense.

    I don't want to spend a lot of money on the lenses, but I don't want a cheap lense. So anywhere from $250-$500. Remember I'm from Canada. :p

    Also I'm not really good with the whole MM on lenses. So I have no idea what they mean when I look at lenses.

    Sorry, I know there are a ton of these threads.
     
  2. Jay42 macrumors 65816

    Jay42

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2005
    #2
    I assume you currently have a lens for Rebel. The 18-55 kit lens? If so, you're going to want a longish range telephoto, and possibly the fisheye you suggested. What kind of shooting do you do?

    As for millimeters, you've got your wide-angle, normal, telephoto, and super telephoto. At some point, what you see in the viewfinder will be roughly the same size as what you're naked eye sees. This is a "normal" focus length-usually around 50mm, but you can experiment with you're camera. Anything below that focal length (smaller mm) is wide-angle and will look smaller that real life. Around 80-200mm is generally the telephoto category. Over 200 is considered super telephoto. This is my opinion, it differs depending on who you ask.

    I believe Canon only makes one fisheye lens, the 15mm f/2.8, but it is over $500 US. As for a zoom I highly recommend the Canon 70-200 f/4 L. It is a professional lens that pretty much gets nothing but positive reviews. A little over your budget but well worth it IMO, and plenty fast unless you shoot a lot of sports.

    Check out The Digital Picture. He reviews all the current Canon lens models and I trust his opinions for the most part. The links to B & H (Buy button) are also convenient for quickly checking prices.

    Canon 15mm f/2.8

    Canon 70-200 f/4 L

    EDIT: If you can't make the 70-200 happen, I would also recommend the 28-135mm IS as a more affordable option.
     
  3. MT37 thread starter macrumors regular

    MT37

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    Oshawa, ON, CA
    #3
    Yeah, I got the stock lense kit. I'm more then happy with it, but I would like something different.

    I'll be mainly doing portraits, live band photos, night photography, and a little bit of everything else really. But the first three are the main ones I'll be doing a lot of.

    I just want the fisheye to give that distorted curved look to some pictures. I have been thinking about doing it in photoshop, but I don't really know what the lense would produce so I couldn't really match it. Plus I would rather have the lense. Haha.
     
  4. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #4
    Go and get the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens right away. It is just under $100 and is exactly perfect for the three subjects you listed. This is absolutly the best bang per buck you will be able to find (OK if you have the extra cash the f/1.4 version is even more perfect but at 3X the price for a small gain)

    Darn, I always tell people to look ahead to the whole kit before they buy a SLR body. Nikon makes a nice 10.5mm fisheye lens for about $550. What the fish eye lens really gives you is a huge angle of view. but I think a lens like this is a specialty item that would not see much general use. I think a 12-24mm lens would see much more use. You might even use it for 1/2 your shots if that "in your face" perspective what you like. 12mm is really wide. 10.5 is bordering on insanely wide

    The 12mm lens would be about 60% widers then the 18mm setting on your ket lens. What this means is yu get closer for the same shot, it's the reduced camera to subject distance that causes the exaggerated perspective.

    If you think 50mm is to short. Buy it anyways, it's only $95 then buy the 85mm f/1.8 later If you are doig night and indoor lw light work you want fasst primes not a slow zoom.
     
  5. MT37 thread starter macrumors regular

    MT37

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    Oshawa, ON, CA
    #5
    Yeah, I saw the 50mm when I was in a camera store, and was so tempted to get it.

    But thanks for the advice.
     
  6. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #6
    Then I suggest you get other lenses rather than get a fisheye and a telephoto zoom lens. I know the fisheye sounds cool, and I wish I had one of those wonderful Nikon 10.5 mm fisheye lenses for fun, but fun costs money, and I'd rather see you get something that can help you accomplish what you want to accomplish rather than a lens that won't let you get the type of photos you want to take.

    If you get a 70-200 mm f/4, which is over your budget, but balance it out with a 50 mm f/1.8, which is like $150 Cdn or so, and well under your budget, then maybe everything evens out. ;) The 50 mm is great for portraits, band photography (assuming you have decent access (distance-wise) to the stage), and night photography because of its wide aperture.
     
  7. MT37 thread starter macrumors regular

    MT37

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Location:
    Oshawa, ON, CA
    #7
    Alright, cool. Thanks. I appreciate the input.
     
  8. Mike Teezie macrumors 68020

    Mike Teezie

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    #8
    With a 1.6 crop factor body like the Rebel, the fisheye effect of the 15mm lens is going to be very, very understated. I honestly wouldn't bother, or look for a third party manufacturer that makes a wider option.

    Knowing what you want to shoot, I would absolutely follow ChrisA's advice and get the 50mm f/1.8. It's a wonderful lens for portraits, and is very fast for doing cool night stuff.
     
  9. trudd macrumors regular

    trudd

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    Location:
    Texas
    #9
    I second ... third the 50 f/1.8.

    I received the 50 1.8 about two years ago for Christmas. The photo office I work for has a 50 f/1.4 and a few 50 f/2.5 Macros. If you want to invest in a good lens, go for the 50 f/1.4. You don't gain that much in terms of aperture, but the focus is faster and it has a higher quality build.

    But, if you're trying to save money the 50 f/1.8 will serve you well for years to come. Of all my lenses, I use the 50 f/1.8 the most for non-sport related shoots.
     

Share This Page