Pulling the trigger within a week...
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,242
Likes: 0
From: Branford, CT
Originally Posted by NFRs2000NYC,Dec 12 2006, 12:48 AM
50mm canon lens for $75?
I can get kit lenses for dirt, but most online reviews that I trust say it isnt very good. Im buying this as an investment, and one of the people that can sway my opinion is Norm....I also believe that a good lens is a good investment, and will be with me forever (unless I break it)....
So I think I will just buy one lens for now..... the 24-70....its expensive....but it seems to be a good overall lens. If Im gonna skimp, I might skimp on the funky lenses, like the fisheye.
I can get kit lenses for dirt, but most online reviews that I trust say it isnt very good. Im buying this as an investment, and one of the people that can sway my opinion is Norm....I also believe that a good lens is a good investment, and will be with me forever (unless I break it)....
So I think I will just buy one lens for now..... the 24-70....its expensive....but it seems to be a good overall lens. If Im gonna skimp, I might skimp on the funky lenses, like the fisheye.
The less expensive lenses are inexpensive because of their materials. The lenses can cause chromatic aberration in your images and when printed look funky. The higher end lenses have flourite elements to eliminate this (or at least lessen the effect)
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,242
Likes: 0
From: Branford, CT
Originally Posted by no_really,Dec 12 2006, 09:21 AM
Most companies' 50mm lenses are fantastic. They are cheap not because they are made like crap, but because they are relatively simple to get right after all the years of building lenses. The kit zooms are crap, I'd agree.
However, a 50mm on a 30D might be a bit long for a "normal." A 35mm would be better, IMHO.
The main problem I see with the L zooms is they are big and heavy. It's like carrying around your biggest telephoto every time you go out, even if you are only using the wide end. You could buy the 24, 35, 50, and 85mm (non L) lenses for roughly the same price as a 24-70 L, and all together they even weigh about the same. And each one is as fast or faster, meaning except for the 24, you'd still be able to take pictures when the 24-70 was useless without flash due to lack of light. You would probably never want to take all the lenses with you most days, and you wouldn't feel like you are carrying around a howitzer just to take pictures of a birthday party.
However, a 50mm on a 30D might be a bit long for a "normal." A 35mm would be better, IMHO.
The main problem I see with the L zooms is they are big and heavy. It's like carrying around your biggest telephoto every time you go out, even if you are only using the wide end. You could buy the 24, 35, 50, and 85mm (non L) lenses for roughly the same price as a 24-70 L, and all together they even weigh about the same. And each one is as fast or faster, meaning except for the 24, you'd still be able to take pictures when the 24-70 was useless without flash due to lack of light. You would probably never want to take all the lenses with you most days, and you wouldn't feel like you are carrying around a howitzer just to take pictures of a birthday party.
Also, the new Canon 50mm f/1.2 USM is $1,600!! it's all about the elements....
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 834
Likes: 18
From: Worthington, OH
My three zooms for my Canon 20d are the 16-35mm f2.8 L, the 24-70mm F2.8 L, and the 70-200 f2.8 L IS. I also have the prime 50mm f2.8.
I use the 16-35mm the most, then the 24-70mm. The 70-200 is too heavy to carry around, so I use it mostly when I can mount my camera on a monopod.
I use the 16-35mm the most, then the 24-70mm. The 70-200 is too heavy to carry around, so I use it mostly when I can mount my camera on a monopod.
Thread Starter
Former Moderator
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 18,852
Likes: 1
From: New York
99% of my photos are taken without flash, including night shots. Im a fan of long exposure times. If I ever need to take a pic of a person at night, Ill just use my Sony (which takes great photos) for a walkaround party camera.) I need a camera/lens combo that takes amazing night shots with no light and no flash, and clear/crisp nature shots.....sometimes cars. I will not be using this for photographing people....often anyway.
The only thing putting me off on the 24-70 is the length. It is a VERY large lens.
The only thing putting me off on the 24-70 is the length. It is a VERY large lens.
Banned
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,319
Likes: 0
From: City
"99% of my photos are taken without flash, including night shots."
Then you want primes. I'd stick with Canon lenses for the most part. That's not to say that Sigma and Tamron, for example, don't make good lenses, just that their good lenses aren't going to be a lot cheaper than Canon's.
A 28 f1.8 would be a great all-around lens, as would the 35 f2. Some people like a wider lens for regular use, so a 21mm or 24mm might be a good choice. For people shots, however, you probably don't want something too wide, as it makes people look kind of funny up close - not flattering.
For a telephoto, it kind of depends on what you want it for. For portraits, a 50mm would actually be close to ideal, but Canon sells both 50mm and 60mm macros, which would work as a portrait telephoto in a pinch. Something in the range of 135mm would give you quite a bit of reach, but would be close to useless indoors (well, not inside a stadium lol). Of course, an 85mm or 100mm would be in between. Unless you are planning on using the telephoto with a tripod, you probably want to stay in the shorter end of things.
As for a fisheye, there aren't really that many choices. Something in the range of 8-15mm would work. Just be aware that there are two kinds of fisheye. There is the kind that put a circular image on 35mm film, and the kind that cover the entire 35mm frame with the image. With your APS-C sensor, even the circular type isn't going to produce the same kind of image as you'd see on film, just so you know. You aren't going to get 180 degree coverage from anything, as far as I know. On the bright side, you won't have to worry about your shoes being in every picture
Then you want primes. I'd stick with Canon lenses for the most part. That's not to say that Sigma and Tamron, for example, don't make good lenses, just that their good lenses aren't going to be a lot cheaper than Canon's.
A 28 f1.8 would be a great all-around lens, as would the 35 f2. Some people like a wider lens for regular use, so a 21mm or 24mm might be a good choice. For people shots, however, you probably don't want something too wide, as it makes people look kind of funny up close - not flattering.
For a telephoto, it kind of depends on what you want it for. For portraits, a 50mm would actually be close to ideal, but Canon sells both 50mm and 60mm macros, which would work as a portrait telephoto in a pinch. Something in the range of 135mm would give you quite a bit of reach, but would be close to useless indoors (well, not inside a stadium lol). Of course, an 85mm or 100mm would be in between. Unless you are planning on using the telephoto with a tripod, you probably want to stay in the shorter end of things.
As for a fisheye, there aren't really that many choices. Something in the range of 8-15mm would work. Just be aware that there are two kinds of fisheye. There is the kind that put a circular image on 35mm film, and the kind that cover the entire 35mm frame with the image. With your APS-C sensor, even the circular type isn't going to produce the same kind of image as you'd see on film, just so you know. You aren't going to get 180 degree coverage from anything, as far as I know. On the bright side, you won't have to worry about your shoes being in every picture
Thread Starter
Former Moderator
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 18,852
Likes: 1
From: New York
OK........so let me narrow this down.....
1)Lens for taking on vacation...must be able to zoom a bit (not a telephoto), take good pics of people on a backdrop....like the eiffel tower or something, you know....regular, normal people vacation pics.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...rch&Q=&ci=12039
Please link me to the best lens you think would be for this application.
2)Lens for shooting artistic photos, my s2000 photoshoots (especially at night), maybe flowers, etc. 99% of the time, my artistic photos are done on a tripod as well.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...rch&Q=&ci=12039
Link if possible.
3)Fisheye....I am still confused about this...I want a lens that provides the fisheye look, but fills up the whole image, not just a circle in the middle, and black around it. Are fisheyes and wide angle lenses the same thing, just different names?
After looking at what a telephoto lens actually is, I decided I dont need that. Its not something I shoot.
Those are the three I will get....I would LOVE it if all three could be had for under $2000...
*If they are good lenses, they DO NOT have to be canon. I know there are other good companies out there.
Sorry to be a pain guys, but its a lot of money, and I dont know as much as you guys, so I want to get it right the first time.
1)Lens for taking on vacation...must be able to zoom a bit (not a telephoto), take good pics of people on a backdrop....like the eiffel tower or something, you know....regular, normal people vacation pics.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...rch&Q=&ci=12039
Please link me to the best lens you think would be for this application.
2)Lens for shooting artistic photos, my s2000 photoshoots (especially at night), maybe flowers, etc. 99% of the time, my artistic photos are done on a tripod as well.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller...rch&Q=&ci=12039
Link if possible.
3)Fisheye....I am still confused about this...I want a lens that provides the fisheye look, but fills up the whole image, not just a circle in the middle, and black around it. Are fisheyes and wide angle lenses the same thing, just different names?
After looking at what a telephoto lens actually is, I decided I dont need that. Its not something I shoot.
Those are the three I will get....I would LOVE it if all three could be had for under $2000...
*If they are good lenses, they DO NOT have to be canon. I know there are other good companies out there.
Sorry to be a pain guys, but its a lot of money, and I dont know as much as you guys, so I want to get it right the first time.
Thread Starter
Former Moderator
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 18,852
Likes: 1
From: New York
Just one more then Ill leave you alone for the night..... 
For Macro shooting....which is one of my favorite types, it seems the Canon Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM macro is pretty good. Are macro lenses fixed, and have no zoom?
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/ca...60_28/index.htm
This place has pretty in depth lens reviews, and they do praise this lens, but they dont have any macro test shots..... I want to shoot things like this with my macro lens...
Will this lens do it without a zoom function?
For Macro shooting....which is one of my favorite types, it seems the Canon Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM macro is pretty good. Are macro lenses fixed, and have no zoom?
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/ca...60_28/index.htm
This place has pretty in depth lens reviews, and they do praise this lens, but they dont have any macro test shots..... I want to shoot things like this with my macro lens...
Will this lens do it without a zoom function?