Getting new lens to replace kit one, any suggestions? Help.

Dark

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 22, 2005
209
5
New Jersey
Alright, well I have a Digital Rebel XT and im looking to buy a lens to replace the kit one for all around use. I already have a 70-200 F/4L USM Telephoto that I love, but obviously I can only use that under certain conditions. I wanted to get a faster lens, like an F/2.8 but im only 16 and im not made of money.

I was looking at this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...oughType=search

I narrowed it down from a bunch and thought that would be a good everyday lens. I would also get the hood for it. I just wanted to know if anyone had it and thought it was good, bad , etc or could recommened anything better in the same price range. Thanks a bunch.
 

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,414
124
Location Location Location
Just tell us what you searched for. It'll be easier.

And before you even tell us, I'm going to recommend a Sigma or Tamron 18-55 mm f/2.8, Sigma 24-70 mm macro lens (which I own), and the Tamron 28-75 mm f2.8 (which is supposed to be fantasmic). You'll save money by not going with Canon, and you'll get a lens that's at least 98% as good as the Canon equivalent, sometimes even better.
 

YS2003

macrumors 68020
Dec 24, 2004
2,139
0
Finally I have arrived.....
carletonmusic said:
I have the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens (fairly new) - it is simply amazing. Highly recommended.
But, isn't it EF-S? If so, you won't be able to use it when you upgrade it to high end SLR camera. Lens wih EF mount would provide more flexibility.
 

Dark

macrumors regular
Original poster
Aug 22, 2005
209
5
New Jersey
Haha If I had that money id buy a macbook.

But yeah does anyone have any advice on the lense i was looking at ...its this just incase that link still doesnt work.

Canon Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens
 

amin

macrumors 6502a
Aug 17, 2003
977
9
Boston, MA
The OP is 16, says he is on a budget, and is contemplating a $300 lens, so I am going to go out on a limb and guess that the $1150 17-55 IS, and $1400 16-35L lenses recommended above are more than he was thinking of spending.

The 24-85 lens you linked to is a good lens if you get a good copy, but reportedly Canon's quality control was a bit lacking on this model. If you buy it, make sure you do so from a store with a good return policy. Personally, I don't find 24mm wide enough on the Rebel XT.

I too have a Rebel XT and 70-200mm f/4L. Recently, I bought a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, and I can recommend it most highly. At $450, it's a bit more than the Canon to which you linked. Here are the pros and cons of this lens:

Pros:
1) Sharp as hell, throughout the zoom range.
2) Neutral color (some say it has a cast, but they are wrong).
3) Small and light (makes for a very compact optical powerhouse when combined with the XT)
4) f2.8 throughout the range
5) fast, accurate focus
6) Great resistance to flare and relative lack of vignetting compared with the more expensive Canon equivalent.
7) Comes with a hood included.

Cons:
1) No IS
2) Bokeh can be not great depending on the shot
3) Moderate field curvature can cause lack of sharpness in the corners when shooting at large apertures
4) AF is significantly noisier and slightly slower than Canon's USM.
5) More susceptible to CA than the Canon.
6) Theoretical risk that Canon may change their camera body AF software in the future to render third-party lenses such as this one incompatible.

Here are a couple professional reviews of this lens:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_1750_28/index.htm
http://www.photo.net/equipment/tamron/17_50_Di/

The image quality I get from this compact marvel is generally on the same fantastic level as the Canon 70-200 f/4L and Canon 50mm f1.4. If $450 is in your budget, and $1150 is not, I think it is your best option for a kit lens replacement.
 

Grimace

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2003
3,541
35
with Hamburglar.
amin said:
The OP is 16, says he is on a budget, and is contemplating a $300 lens, so I am going to go out on a limb and guess that the $650 17-40L, $1150 17-55 IS, and $1400 16-35L lenses recommended above are more than he was thinking of spending.
He has an $800 L lens already -- I didn't know his scale of what expensive means.
 

amin

macrumors 6502a
Aug 17, 2003
977
9
Boston, MA
carletonmusic said:
He has an $800 L lens already -- I didn't know his scale of what expensive means.
The Canon 70-200mm f4L lens he has commonly sells for less than $600. It is the one L lens that can be had in the "consumer" price range. He is contemplating a $300 kit lens replacement while saying he is open to "anything better in the same price range." Perhaps it isn't easy to pinpoint his scale exactly, but I think he gives a decent sense of it.
 

Cloud9

macrumors regular
Aug 10, 2005
229
0
between flesh and thought
Whoa, What! School me, please.

YS2003 said:
But, isn't it EF-S? If so, you won't be able to use it when you upgrade it to high end SLR camera. Lens wih EF mount would provide more flexibility.
Um, I am pretty new to photography, and every penny I am spending right now needs to be an investment into the future. EF, EF-S,- Compatibility issues with better models of canon cameras? I own a 20d, with the kit lense and the Tamron f2.8 28-75 (I think thats the zoom, its out for repair right now.) Can someone explain what I need to pay attention too to make sure that my lenses will be compatible with any other Canon Camera I buy later on.

Peas and Ques
 

-hh

macrumors 68030
Jul 17, 2001
2,527
323
NJ Highlands, Earth
I'm not having any success in getting the links to open. Probably a problem on my end, but I think the question is wide angle?

I've been thinking about going wider because of the cropping issue on the 20D.


The "biggest bang for the buck" in WA could very well be the Tokina AF 193 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5. Its 35mm equivalent is "only" 31-56mm, but its a good value and its an EF mount.

I paid over $300 for mine when it first came out; its now only $150. Here's one product review.

Another possibility could be the Tokina AT-X Pro 124 12-24mm f/4 ($450), which also remains on an EF mount (although a full frame body, it reportedly will vignette when wider than ~16mm). On a crop body, its 12mm would be a ~19mm equivalent. Since I already own the 19-35mm, I'm thinking about picking up this one next.

Some specific reviews:
http://portal.chester.sg/content/view/65/2/
http://www.photo.net/equipment/tokina/12-24-f4/

A generic WA review:
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/wide-angle-lenses.html
 

YS2003

macrumors 68020
Dec 24, 2004
2,139
0
Finally I have arrived.....
Cloud9 said:
Um, I am pretty new to photography, and every penny I am spending right now needs to be an investment into the future. EF, EF-S,- Compatibility issues with better models of canon cameras? I own a 20d, with the kit lense and the Tamron f2.8 28-75 (I think thats the zoom, its out for repair right now.) Can someone explain what I need to pay attention too to make sure that my lenses will be compatible with any other Canon Camera I buy later on.
If you stick with EF series lens from Canon, I think your Canon lens should be compatible for higher end cameras such as 1ds, 1d, 5d. EF-S lens cannot be used for those high end units. My 30D can use both EF and EF-S. But, I am not going to buy EF-S lens as it may limit its future usage when I decided to go for upgrade in the future. I also have Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 (I did not get the kit when I bought 30D's body).
 

sjl

macrumors 6502
Sep 15, 2004
441
0
Melbourne, Australia
YS2003 said:
If you stick with EF series lens from Canon, I think your Canon lens should be compatible for higher end cameras such as 1ds, 1d, 5d. EF-S lens cannot be used for those high end units. My 30D can use both EF and EF-S. But, I am not going to buy EF-S lens as it may limit its future usage when I decided to go for upgrade in the future. I also have Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 (I did not get the kit when I bought 30D's body).
All true. However, in limiting yourself to only EF lenses, you're restricting your focal length ranges; Canon does not make a cheap "standard wide angle" zoom (meaning around the 17-18 mm focal length range) in the EF mount - only in EF-S. The only choices for such a lens in the EF range would be the 16-35mm f/2.8, or the 17-40mm f/4; both of those are overkill for such a job, being designed for wide-angle shots on a 35mm body.

Having said that, there's nothing wrong with going down that path - just be aware that you are paying a price premium for the possibility of being able to take your lenses with you if you go for a full-frame body. For my money, I'd probably get the 17-85mm, and look at selling it if/when I bought a body that it wouldn't mount on.

The other point: remember that there are now quite a few Sigma (and probably Tamron) lenses out there designed for the crop bodies as well. In those instances, as I understand it, you don't have the different mount to stop you using those lenses on a full frame body, so you'll see severe vignetting in such a situation (I could be wrong, however). Make sure you check the specs before buying if that's a concern.
 

YS2003

macrumors 68020
Dec 24, 2004
2,139
0
Finally I have arrived.....
sjl said:
All true. However, in limiting yourself to only EF lenses, you're restricting your focal length ranges; Canon does not make a cheap "standard wide angle" zoom (meaning around the 17-18 mm focal length range) in the EF mount - only in EF-S. The only choices for such a lens in the EF range would be the 16-35mm f/2.8, or the 17-40mm f/4; both of those are overkill for such a job, being designed for wide-angle shots on a 35mm body.
Those EF lens you menionted are what I am seriously considering to buy. I think both are L lens. The slower lens (f/4) is less expensive than the faster one (f/2.8). I heard EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is a very capable wide angle zoom lens (which is priced less than the above mentioned L lens). But, EF-S mounting has stopped me from buying that one.

It is likely good quality lens will outlast the camera body. So, I think it would be good to consider how your current purchases can be used for the future upgrade.
 

cgratti

macrumors 6502a
Dec 28, 2004
782
0
Central Pennsylvania, USA
About $75 - the 50 mm f/1.8. Fast and super sharp pictures. Did I mention it's only about $75?

Every Canon owner should own the Nifty-Fifty.

Or

The Canon 100mm macro, great lens for macro or partraits, and at f/2.8 its pretty fast......
For something wide, I have the Sigma 10-20 mm, VERY wide and about $440 used....
 

YS2003

macrumors 68020
Dec 24, 2004
2,139
0
Finally I have arrived.....
cgratti said:
About $75 - the 50 mm f/1.8. Fast and super sharp pictures. Did I mention it's only about $75?

Every Canon owner should own the Nifty-Fifty.

Or

The Canon 100mm macro, great lens for macro or partraits, and at f/2.8 its pretty fast......
For something wide, I have the Sigma 10-20 mm, VERY wide and about $440 used....
Yeah, Canon 100mm f/2.8 is a very sharp lens. I have not yet done much of macro shots even though I have this already.

50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 would be a must-have for Canon SLR owners, as many other people in the know attest. I went with 50mm f/1.4 for extra stop.
 

snap58

macrumors 6502
Jan 29, 2006
310
0
somewhere in kansas
YS2003 said:
I went with 50mm f/1.4 for extra stop.
The 1.4 is well worth the extra money, in addition to the extra 2/3 stop (not really one stop), the 8 blade aperture (in lieu of 5 on the 1.8) is a big plus on blurring the backgrounds, plus the manual over ride. It is also as sharp (or sharper) at 2.0 than the 1.8 is at 2.8.