Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7

    Opinions please .........

    Hi ,

    I currently own the Digital Rebel Xt w/ the kit lens and also own a 50mm 1.4 lens. I would like to purchase another lens and after reading all the reviews I am really confused. Unfortunately I don't live anywhere close to a good camera store. What I am hoping to buy is a good walk around lens that will deliver sharp, clear pics. With my current lenses I am frequently disappointed not having a wide enough lens and also need a good lens to take indoor low light shots of people. I am not sure if I will be able to purchase one lens to meet my needs or will I eventually need to purchase two lenses? Maximum cost cannot exceed $800. I want to get good lenses that I will be able to keep for a long time. I was thinking about the Canon 17-40mm f/4 L. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.
    Shelly

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    The 17-40mm L f/4 is not gonna be good enough on the XT for low light. You want something brighter like the 17-55 f/2.8 or the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    32
    you never said what lens you got with your kit... the 18-55mm..??...the next logical choice would be a medium-long zoom...like the 70-200mm; but for available indoor lighting; the 28-135mm IS would probably be a better choice

    there are 2 topics in this forum you need to look at... 1> the lens reviews...it just won't get any simpler than that 2> the Canon rebate thread... you can get 15-500 in rebates on certain canon lenses, if you act quickly

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7

    Smile not interested in zoom

    The kit lens is the 28-105mm. I am not really interested in a zoom don't really find must use for a zoom. I just sold a 75-300mm IS lens on Ebay because I never used it. I purchased to use for my son's basketball games and he is now done with basketball so the lens was just collecting dust.
    I sold it for $350. and want to put that money towards a lens that I will use more frequently.

    Shelly

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL USA
    Posts
    935
    35/2 or maybe save for another few months and up the budget by $200 for a 17-55/2.8 IS.
    Nikon D300 | MB-D10 | Nikkor 12-24/4 | Nikkor 50/1.8 | Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRI | Sigma 18-50/2.8 | SB-800 | SB-80DX (x4) | Radiopopper JrX Studio |

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,163
    If you don't want a zoom, why are you considering the 17-40mm?

    Maybe you mean you don't want a telephoto lens...those are the ones that give you "reach".
    Ouch.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7
    You are right ! I meant a telephoto lens.

    Shelly

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Brookfield, MA
    Posts
    1,140
    The lens linked below is sort of an update of Tamrons 17-50 f/2.8. They've added VC (Tamron speak for Vibration Compensation = IS (Image Stabilizer). This should make it a pretty good lens for handheld shots in lower light than normal and would make a good walk around lens. It's new to the market, so as B&H's site shows, it's not available as of yet. If you're not in too much of a hurry for a new lens this might be worth a look when it's available.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...0mm_f_2_8.html


    This is the original non-VC version below. I do have this lens and it's been good. Only minor annoying thing is when it auto-focuses, there is a bit of buzz noise.
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...2_8_XR_Di.html
    Last edited by Mark_48; 11-16-2009 at 06:11 PM.
    Mark........

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    32
    take a look at the 60mm f/2.8 macro...no IS, but you should be able to hand-hold it to 1/30 & still get good shots. I used my 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor on my analog 35mm for available-light indoor shots all the time...it was my favorite lens...the 60mm macro will let you do killer close-ups, & copy work, too...I just got a new one for 392 from Adorama...there currently is a $30 discount on this lens; which expires next week

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Shelly View Post
    Hi ,

    ... What I am hoping to buy is a good walk around lens that will deliver sharp, clear pics..... I am frequently disappointed not having a wide enough lens and also need a good lens to take indoor low light shots of people. ...

    ...Maximum cost cannot exceed $800. I want to get good lenses that I will be able to keep for a long time. I was thinking about the Canon 17-40mm f/4 L....
    Shelly
    The 17-40 is good lens, but f/4 is not fast enough for indoor use without a flash.

    Options:
    1. Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. Very well respected lens.
    2. Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Very nice lens, but even used it runs about $850.
    4. Have you considered a flash? Many times even f/2.8 is not fast enough for indoor shots. A 430EX Speedlight runs about $200 and will open up a whole new world of indoor portrait photography to you. I admit I'm not much of a flash user, but there are definitlely times when a flash is the best way to get the shot....(The 17-40 f/4 would be fine indoors with a flash).

    430 EX bounced with 85mm 1.8 lens @ f/3.2...
    Last edited by michaelb; 11-15-2009 at 06:49 PM.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

Posting Permissions

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