Have a 30D and want to use it! (Lens advice)
In 2002 I bought my first digicam, the Canon G2. It was my second ever camera (APS P&S was the first) and I still love it. I never use the auto mode and try to experiment and learn all the time.
I was a member of a now 'deceased' canon user site and was soon starting to show interest in DSLRs. When the 20D came out I started saving and a few weeks ago got to the target budget, when the 30D was announced. The larger LCD and better buffer convinced me to wait for it's release.
This morning I didn't know it was out in stores and at 5pm I walked out the store with my 30D body. But... I don't have a lens. I decided against the kit because the kit lens has far to many complaints (plenty of people who use it as a paperweight or football ), and the range I think would be too limited to start out with, so I figured I'd save the 100 euro.
I was convinced to get the Sigma 18-200 by several things I read, heard and seen. The store where I got only carried the Tamron 18-200 which didn't seem to perform as well, thought the people there had read other things.
So I decided to do another search before going on a lens hunt on monday, and I have to say I'm still confused.
I am complete beginner when it comes to SLR. I'd like to have a lens that's not too expensive with a good range to get me going. I'm planning on saving up for better lenses eventually, but right now I need to get to know my camera first and use it a lot, so I know what I like/want/etc.
These are the options I've seen with considerations:
Sigma 18-200/Tamron 18-200 - I know they're not the best, but you have to start somewhere and from what I've read they're reasonable all-round lenses for their price, compact etc. Tamron vs Sigma I've read a lot which tells me mostly that the sigma is optically better and better built but has more focussing issues, though these seem to be limited to certain copies, plenty of happy customers too.
Canon 17-85 - have read that the quality is not much better than the sigma. Doesn't seem worth it with the more limited range
Canon 28-135 - Can't find much comparison, more limited range and a 200 euro price diff.. Seems I might better put that money aside to save for the real better lenses?
So basically, help! I can't stand it, finally having a DSLR body and not being able to play with it.
Last edited by kvdnberg; 03-27-2006 at 02:35 AM.
Reason: Thread was moved to the wrong forum (brand confusion?)
The Sigma or Tamron 18-200 are great lens'. It really comes down to what is most important to you. Do you want a large focal range...quality...what exactly will you be photographing? My first purchase was the Sigma 18-200 and was very happy with it...still have it...but then I got the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 for a little more ($360), and I wish I would have bought this lens in the first place. Although the lens is a mutha size wize and somewhat limited on the focal length, the quality of pictures are astounding. Check out www.sigma4less.com and www.bhphotovideo.com for the best prices on lens. It's easy to get carried away with wanting and paying for photo gear, but it sounds like you have a budget in mind. Congrats on the new 30d. I anxiously await you posting some pics here for us to see how nice that camera is!
Originally Posted by kvdnberg
here is a close up
Lenses are the window to your sensor, they are what lay the image down for recording. Pretty important equipment, more so than your body...and you have purchased a fine one, at least from what I've read of the specs. I digress...
I think you made a fine decision walking out before purchasing the Sigma or the Tamron, those super zooms tend to have bad characteristics on one end or the the other, sometimes both ends(and some in the middle too). I would imagine you would be happy for a while with one of those lenses but you would outgrow them quickly.
I won't make any specific suggestions, but give guidelines:
1)Buy the best lens(es) you can afford, you have already laid a large amount of cash out for one of the best consumer bodies out there, don't cripple it by purchasing poor glass.
2)Buy the best lenses you can afford(oops I already said that), constant aperture lenses, faster lenses, lenses with smaller zoom ranges, all tend to have better characterisics than varible aperture/super zoom/slower lenses do. Faster would mean at least f/4, 2.8 being better, 1.8 even better but rarely found on a zoom lens, if not ever. Faster apertures and the best quality will be found on prime(one focal length)lenses, but at the expense of convenience.
3)Buy the best lenses you can afford(noticing a trend here?)Manufacturer lenses tend to be more expensive, and back in my film days were head and shoulders above their counterparts in the 3rd party manufacturers, until you tried the 3rd party lenses that cost almost as much as the OEM lenses. The 3rd party guys have all but closed this gap and are producing some fine lenses that come close to, or better the OEM offerings for a lot less money.
4)Buy the best lenses you can afford(haven't I heard this before?) There is no shortcut, you can start with inexpensive glass and if you get serious you will find yourself replacing it with pro type glass fairly quickly.
The photographer is the ultimate final word on the quality of a photograph, but the lens will allow the best chance at fulfilling that vision.
Last edited by TenD; 03-25-2006 at 04:32 PM.
A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.
Echoing the above...
I sport a limited Tamron line of lenses on my Canon 20D. For the most part, it gets the job done. Excellent coverage. Throw 50mm f/1.8 on for snappy portraits and go to town. Sigma's 18-200mm does a great job, too, considering what I have seen.
Would I love to have a EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM or the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM... (good lord, it makes your mouth dry, thinking about it, doesn't it?)? Sure thing!
Let me check that wallet, again... nope, still not enough sheckles to make this happen. Heck, if I did... I'd have that Canon 5D instead... and the above lenses!
Wow, what a layout!
- BFA, Digital Photography
A Photographer Is Forever
Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.
Might look into the tamaron 17-70? I've head it's cheaper then 17-85 and reasonable = quality.
the 17-85 might find used on fredmiranda for good price, slow at long end.
28-135 is a good lens but slow at long end.
Do you really just want one lens on your DSLR? If not, I woul go another road for now.
A Canon EF 28-105 II USM for "walk around", very good lens for the money, good colour and contrast. One of Canon's 'poor mans L' lenses. A bit above 200$ I think.
A Tamron 19-35mm lens to cover wider angles when needed, very good for the very low price.
A Sigma 70-300 APO DG macro for the longer ranges, and a 1:2 macro mode to boot, for about 200$.
I think this will give you better range and image quality than the all in one lenses you mentioned, and part of the attraction of SLRs is of course that you can use more than one lens.
Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30
Thanks everyone for your advice.
Because the Sigma and Tamron just aren't really convincing me I've decided to take at least part of coldrain's advice.
I've looked into the Canon EF 28-105 II USM and do find many positive things in terms of price vs quality. No real big issues etc. It's about 270 euro around here.
What I have also looked into is the Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 USM IS (450 euro) because I do like to shoot in low light conditions without flash. As far as I've read the difference is in the IS and the wider range (excuse me if I'm not using the right terms here) but optically they are pretty equaled. The cons of the 135 are price and size/weight.
I could afford the 28-135 (only just) but I could also safe the cash and use that on another lens at some point. Right now I just want to get a feel for it all and see what I miss, the macro end or the zoom end.
The other issue for me is where to get it - I have read it's a good idea to try one or two copies of a lens in the store before buying (though I don't really know what to look at!) and in that respect my options are somewhat limited. The store where I bought the 30D does not carry either lens and though they could order it I doubt they're gonna order more than one just so I can try them. There's another local store that deals mostly over internet but I've had very bad experiences with the way they treat their customers, though it's been a while since I've given them another chance. Aside from that they have a closed box policy for camera's (the camera box does not open before it's purchased, and no showroom models) and I don't know if the same goes for lenses, but I wouldn't be surprised. That leaves a number of 'normal' photography stores, but I don't know where they carry this lens and not sure where to get good service atm.
p.s. I'm also going to be shooting at a wedding in september, I won't be the 'real' photographer but I'd still like to be able to do a good job.
Any advice/thoughts are again appreciated.
same confusion here
Don't worry.. ur not alone ) I'm getting my 30D body tomorrow. But very confused with the lens purchase..
I alreay own canon 50 f1.8 and 70-200 f4 lenses... now my dilemma is on the all-around lens. I dont want to just buy, but invest in lenses. My feeling is in another year or so, full frame bodies price will drop. that time if we have good lenses (not just EF-S), it will be very useful. so I inclined towards canon 24-70 f2.8 ($1250) and to fill the wide angle gap, I'm thought of tokina 12-24 f4 ($370) lens. But my budget is limiting to buy this combo. I heard very good about tamron 28-75 f2.8 in all the forums I read. they even say it is very much comparable with canon 24-70 f2.8 in all aspects. I also heard very good about tokina 12-24.
I guess I'll either buy canon 24-70 f2.8 + tokina 12-24 f4 (or) tamron 28-75 f2.8 + tokina 12-24 depending on the spot mood when I purchase..
same confusion here contd...
sorry I mentioned the prices wrong in my previous posting.
canon 24-70 f2.8 = $1150
tamron 28-75 f2.8 = $375
tokina 12-24 f4 = $500
and about ur question, where to buy.
I usually buy these kinda stuff from amazon... only reason.. NO Tax... for 30D + canon lens + tokina lenses I'd pay around $250 in tax if I buy from local store. though u "feel" the lens in the store and take some test shots, U still test the lens a lot after coming home (night, low light etc) amazon has 30 day return policy just like any other store (bit of hassle to ship et all) but it works for me.. YMMV
Unfortunately Amazon is not an option for me since I live in the Netherlands, not the US. The 'local' Amazon's (UK & Germany) even only ship to UK/Ireland and Germany/Austria. Besides the price at Amazon.de is no better than the local store.
Originally Posted by princejersey
Right now I'm considering the Sigma 17-70 (see Lenses? Help!) which I will have to shop around a bit for first. I'm not too comfortable ordering over the internet, not just because I want to physically pick it up myself, but because my faith in the post here is not too high, and because I want to be able to trust the store that if I have a problem they will help me. There are plenty of (online) stores here that'll just shove the products over and leave you hanging if somethings wrong.
Still have to think about it for a while, make sure I don't do something I'll really regret.
As those prices go, I would love those L lenses but I simply can't afford them. I do want something good and I'm willing to pay for that but there's only so much I can do now. I know someone might say, don't get a tele now but invest that money in an all round L lens but I know I have other things coming up that'll prevent me from gettng anything else for a good while and I just don't want to wait that long to have those options. So top of the line it'll not be yet. Perhaps in 3-4 years....