Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21

    quick lens question?

    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
    Last edited by nismo; 06-29-2006 at 06:02 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    300
    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.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Lightbulb If you're not sure...

    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 :

    http://www.dcresource.com/forums/sho...459#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.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 06-29-2006 at 09:51 PM.
    Don Schap - 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.

    flickr & Sdi

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,807
    Quote Originally Posted by 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
    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.
    canon 17-40 L, 70-200 f2.8 L, 400 f5.6 L, 50 f1.4 & f1.8, 1.4x TC, sigma 15 f2.8 fisheye, flash 500 DG Super, kenko extension tubes

    note to self: don't participate in sad, silly threads unless you're looking for sad, silly responses.

    "anti-BS filter" (from andy): http://dcresource.com/forums/showpos...94&postcount=4

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by ReF
    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

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    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
    Last edited by nismo; 06-30-2006 at 05:17 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by nismo
    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

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Smile A lot of young photographers...

    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/...d.php?t=184213

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

    flickr & Sdi

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by 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/...d.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 $$$
    Or theres something better for $500-$600?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    21
    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?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •