what inexpensive zoom lens for Rebel XT?
Hi - I'm hoping that I can get some input and advice here. I asked a while back about zoom lenses for the Rebel XT, and I think I've narrowed down my choices, and am ready now to actually get something for my upcoming birthday. Budget is roughly $200. I have the Rebel XT with the kit lens and also recently got the Canon 50mm f/1.8 (LOVE IT!). A zoom lens will likely be my ONLY other additional lens. I mostly shoot pictures of my kids, and want to be able to zoom in from across the yard, at sports activities, school programs, etc.
I'm looking at:
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras - have heard pretty good things about this, but also heard that it can hard to avoid blur, especially with indoor shooting and without a tripod (which I would probably only RARELY shoot with, so I need a lens that can do good pictures with just a reasonably steady hand).
Sigma 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 DG Compact Aspherical Hyperzoom AutoFocus Macro Lens with Hood for Canon EOS Cameras - this one REALLY interests me, as it seems like it is a good balance of price, focal length, and has a slightly wider aperature than the other options that I'm looking at. I really wish I could find some reviews of it, though. Am I correct in my understanding that the shorter focal length makes a tripod less necessary for a steady shot? I like this it's more compact than the others, also, but realize that the trade-off for that is shorter focal length.
Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD 1:2 Auto Focus Macro Zoom Lens with Hood for Canon EOS, 6 Year USA Warranty Maybe this one, which was recommended to me here. Is this pretty comparable to the Canon 75-300mm up above?
Thanks in advance for any help or advice you can offer!
You need a tripod sooner with LONG focal lengths, because at longer focal lengths camera shake shows up sooner (with shorter exposure times than with shorter focal lengths).
The Sigma 28-200 is an "all in one" convenience lens for full frame film SLRs.
28mm used to be wide angle, on your XT it is not very wide at all because of the 1.6x crop factor from the smaller than 35mm sensor.
The modern "all in one" convenience lenses are 18-200mm, adding what was lost with the crop factor. They are more expensive than your stated $200.
The Canon 75-300 USM III is not a very sharp lens, especially not at 300mm. This makes it not a very popular choice for digital SLRs anymore.
The Tamron 70-300 you list is also not the best of 70-300 class lenses.
The best you can do to add some tele range to your kit lens is the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG Macro. Even at 300mm it will give quite a bit sharper photos than the ones mentioned above, only the edges will be more soft.
And it offers a nice 1:2 macro mode, giving you some macro ability for free. It costs about $220, so just about fits your stated budget.
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
70-300mm f/4-5.6 ... perfect for the yard
I happen to own a TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD and it delivers a fine looking shot.
Not particularly the fastest focus I've ever seen, but you get there in short order.
Cost wise, well within the budget at around $159.00.
It's not a very heavy lens either, so an easy tote.
If your budget has an increase ... you might consider the NEW TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF).
This one lens will cover almost all the bases and you probably will not have to switch lens for nearly all your shots.
Last edited by DonSchap; 03-20-2007 at 09:34 AM.
- 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.
damn, talk about convenience. i could possibly use something like that to go to the grand canyon with.
40d | 5d mk II | 2.8/16 zenitar fisheye | 16-35L | 35L | sigma 1.4/50 | sigma 2.8/50 Macro | sigma 1.4/85 | 70-200L IS
disclaimer: posts are for personal entertainment only...not to be taken seriously...ever.
Wow, Don... I wish that lens WERE in my price range! Looks like a great one to have!
Thanks for the input! So, I gather that you both think one of the 70-300mm is a better option, than the Sigma 28-200mm the I am considering above? I know that the 28-200 obviously means giving up some of the zoom power... but... I keep coming back to the fact that it is more compact and has a wider aperature, which might be helpful on those occasions when I'm taking indoor shots. Also thinking it would be more multi-purpose (I guess that's why Coldrain refers to it as an all-in-one, huh?), since I can also get the wider angle at the 28mm end of the focal length.
On the other hand... if the point of buying a zoom lens is to be able to...well... zoom, then maybe I should not be so concerned with the 28mm vs. 70mm end of the lens.
I know for a lot of you who are very serious about your photography, dropping $200 on a lens would be no big deal... but... for us, it's a pretty significant purchase and I just want to make sure I get the most bang for my buck!
Check this link for some samples from the Sigma. http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/28200f35
Originally Posted by scrappydeb
You are confusing "zoom" with "telephoto". A 28-200mm lens is a ~7x zoom lens (200/28) while the 70-300mm lens is a~4x zoom lens (300/70).
Originally Posted by scrappydeb
Since you do have the kit lens and a 50mm f/1.8 though, I would agree that the 70-300mm lens would be the choice for you.
My only advice, and its derived from having gone through it before, is don't cheat yourself with that budget. You are really limiting yourself. What will happen is that at first, you'll be happy with your new lens, but after the newness wears off, and it will rather quickly, you'll regret purchasing the $200 lens.
Your 50 1.8 will prove more useful for school programs than any $200 zoom lens. Depending on how close you may be to the stage an 85 1.8 or perhaps the 100 f2.0 would be the cheapest/best bet for school program types of photography.
For outdoor yard types of shots and youth sports I'd recommend uping your budget to allow you purchase the 70-300 F4-5.6 IS USM lens (No to DO version). The image quality and overall performance is very very much worth taking your budget x 2.5 and getting your hands on this lens. It will not substitute for a 70-200 F2.8 but it does very well for its price range.
Good luck, saving a while longer will be very much worth it.
Last edited by aparmley; 03-20-2007 at 08:13 PM.
Nikon D90 | Sigma 10-20 HSM | DX 18-105 f3.5-5.6 VR | DX 55-200 VR | 35 f/2.0 D | 50 f/1.4 D | 85mm F/1.8 D | SB-800 x 3 | SU-800
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Wise words here! I think he means it will "Not" sub for an L, but gets very close- especially for money spent.
Originally Posted by aparmley
Canon XTi Black body
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II-Canon EF 28-135 F3.5-5.6 IS USM-Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM-Canon 100-400L
Opteka Battery Pack Grip-Canon 430 EX-Manfrotto 3021bnpro
2 Sandisk Ultra II 1 gig cf cards-2 Sandisk Ultra II 2 gig cf cards-Tamrac 5606
Thanks for your input, I really do appreciate it. But, there is no way that I can drop that kind of money on a lens. It isn't a matter of HAVING the money, it's a matter of what we are willing to allocate our family resources towards, and even buying this camera was a big stretch.
Originally Posted by aparmley
I enjoy photography, but I'm not as seriously "into" it as most of you here - my real hobby is scrapbooking! Certainly, photography plays an important role in that, but I can't have that kind of money invested into a lens, nor would it go over very well with the hubby!
So, I guess I'm back to trying to decide on the best option that IS within my budget, and I guess it seems like the 70-300mm makes the most sense. I just wish I could talk myself OUT OF wanting that 28-200mm though...