quick lens question?

[nismo]

Hello, I recently bought Rebel XT because i was getting tired of point and shoot cameras, and wanted to do more with my pictures with more manual control. I mostly take pictures of cars, and a mix of nature. My question is what good lense i can buy for $500 that would be great for those kinda pictures. Oh and i still have my kit lense it came with. Im asking this because this is all new to me and im still learing and reading as much info as i can. Since all of you here seem like Pros i thought this is a good place to start:) Oh and good zoom would be nice too.

thanks in advance :D

[pagnamenta]

There are a lot of lenses out there, with many focal ranges. If you are looking for something near 300mm for photographing cars, Sigma and Canon sell some mediocre consumer glass. Good lenses would be:

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO -- $300
Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM -- $280

The best lenses at the moment might be a little out of your budget, but the reviews have been great. I think the lens is worth it.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM -- $560 - $600

Those would be the best lenses to pair with the kit lens. You have the option of going with a 55-200mm lens but they are generally known for their poor quality.

[DonSchap]

If you're not too sure of your light issues, a good starter lens with some wide angle and some telephoto would be the:

Canon EF 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 II USM

I recently recommended this at the following link (below), with a purchase location and a decent review link... go to this thread and have a look :D :

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?p=135459#post135459

If you purchased this zoom lens and a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II "prime" lens, you'd have a nice pair of lens for snapping cars and have not blown your suggested budget.

Something else to consider... a 70(75)-300mm Zoom has a minumum of 5 to 6 feet focusing distance.
The 28-105mm will let you get to 1.5 feet minimum.

Good luck in your decision.

[ReF]

Hello, I recently bought Rebel XT because i was getting tired of point and shoot cameras, and wanted to do more with my pictures with more manual control. I mostly take pictures of cars, and a mix of nature. My question is what good lense i can buy for $500 that would be great for those kinda pictures. Oh and i still have my kit lense it came with. Im asking this because this is all new to me and im still learing and reading as much info as i can. Since all of you here seem like Pros i thought this is a good place to start:) Oh and good zoom would be nice too.

thanks in advance :D

do you want to shoot wide or tele?

to me, cars can mean race cars from a distance or up close at a show. nature can mean wide landscapes or wildlife from a distance.

[nismo]

do you want to shoot wide or tele?

to me, cars can mean race cars from a distance or up close at a show. nature can mean wide landscapes or wildlife from a distance.

I dont really car too much about wide too much.. I will be shooting Tele, and yes that includes stationay cars and learning how to take great pics of moving cars ( not race cars ) Show cars.
For nature it will alot of landscape and little bit of wildlife from a distance. Im sorry if i wasnt specific in my previous post :(

[nismo]

Well im stuck on 2 lenses now the EF 70-200 f/4 L and EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS as mention before by pagnamenta. Both are in the same price range $600, im willing to pay little more to get a better glass. Also shouldnt the EF 70-200 f/4L be better since its L-Series lense? i dont car too much about IS. I saw pictures from both lenses that were taken with the Rebel XT from, birds, landscape, cars and people and L-series seems to be the sharpest and well seturated one. Or em i wrong.....
What are your thoughts? Thanks again :)

[Clyde]

Well im stuck on 2 lenses now the EF 70-200 f/4 L and EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS.

Also shouldnt the EF 70-200 f/4L since its L-Series lense? i dont car too much about IS. I saw pictures from both lenses that were taken with the Rebel XT from, birds, landscape, cars and people and L-series seems to be the sharpest and well seturated one. Or em i wrong...


Yup, you got it. The L is the Bentley of lenses. Go for the best and you won't be dissapointed, or want to upgrade later.

Clyde

[DonSchap]

A lot of young photographers tend to move to the EF 70~200 f/4L USM for its portability... and that seems a little backwards... because the older photographers tend to buy the f/2.8L... IS or non-IS. It is significantly heavier.

A recent POTN poll showed, among the respondents, that there were nearly as many f/2.8L IS as their were f/4L out there... 76 vs 66 which is almost dead even on it, in fact. (see link below).

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=184213

For the price, the f/4L seems the bargain. Weight wise... nearly half that of the f/2.8L IS

[nismo]

A lot of young photographers tend to move to the EF 70~200 f/4L USM for its portability... and that seems a little backwards... because the older photographers tend to buy the f/2.8L... IS or non-IS. It is significantly heavier.

A recent POTN poll showed, among the respondents, that there were nearly as many f/2.8L IS as their were f/4L out there... 76 vs 66 which is almost dead even on it, in fact. (see link below).

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=184213

For the price, the f/4L seems the bargain. Weight wise... nearly half that of the f/2.8L IS


Weight doesnt bother me nor does size. All im interested is to get the best bang for my buck. And of course the best image quality for the $$$ :D
Or theres something better for $500-$600? :confused:

[nismo]

also look @ these photos from a 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM lens used with the XT

http://www.pbase.com/2bruce/canon_70_300_usm_is_

Thats pretty good i would say no?

[cdifoto]

Weight doesnt bother me nor does size. All im interested is to get the best bang for my buck. And of course the best image quality for the $$$ :D
Or theres something better for $500-$600? :confused:

Well you're certainly not going to get one of the fast (f/2.8) Ls for $600 or less...not even on the used market.

Both the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS and the 70-200 f/4L have excellent reputations. I don't think either one would be "wrong". The real difference is with the constant aperture of the 70-200mm. HOWEVER, f/4 is generally slow anyway for anything except daylight so you may be better off with the IS. It'll help with still subjects at least.

[nismo]

thank you for all your comments, i will take all of that into considiration on my next buy. I think i might be going with the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM since i heard the the EF 70-200 F/4 strugles a bit in dark satuations?.. I forgot to mention I also like takeing a bit of night shoots too.