Reading mode: Light Dark

$300 for a beginner all-around lens

Go to last post
A

adorecm

New member
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm going to be purchasing a Canon 350D/XT in a couple weeks, and I need some help selecting a lens.

My budget allows for about $300 to be spent on a lens (this price is, however, flexible to some degree....$450 perhaps).

This lens will be used for a scholarly project, and I will taking pictures of these things: large ships (oil tankers specifically), oil refineries, landscapes (all over the Western U.S., mostly in Alaska and California), people, town-scapes, fast moving cars, airplanes, and many other small and large objects.

I'm very confused as to what Focal Length I need -- I assume an all-around zoom lens (i.e. 20-100?) would be most functional? Any recommendations would be much appreciated.

Also, since I'm a beginner and will have a steep learning curve, would I be better off with an Image Stabilized (IS) lens?

Additionally, I do have access to a 28-80mm lens from Canon EOS 2000 Kit -- I'm not sure if it has the same mount, however.

Thank you!!
 
--
Canon EOS 20D
Canon 10-22Is
Canon 17-85 IS
Canon 100-400 IS L Lens
Canon 70-300 is DOS
Canon I9900 printer
Kenko 1.4 300 PRO Extender
TaMRON 18-200 1:3.5-6.3 -
Bogem Manfro Tripod 055-3
Arca Swiss Ballhead with plates

With a budget like you have I would go fot the Tamron 18-200 it is a very good lend on a low income .

I notice there was a person sugesting the Tamron 28-75 I would go for thee Tamron 18-200 I believe it comes with a 7 year warantee .
Get a protect filterprefered or a UV .

Buy from good company like B&H ground shipping including insurance is about $8.00 no tax less than on week deiivery .

I have it and I carry it around in my glove box for that moment I do not have a big lens with me .
Have fun .

Peter Cook
 
The Tamron 18-200mm while an excellent focal range is not that great when it comes to image quality.

read here:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_18200_3563/index.htm

You mentioned you would be photographing fast moving objects.

The 2.8 of the 28-75mm Tammy would be good for that, IS really doesn't help when the subject is moving, only when the camera/lens is moving. Also the 2.8 would be great for low light situations.
--
 
..I would recommend on your 1.6x body. With a max of $450, in terms of best IQ, I'd say the Sigma 1850EX or the new Sigma 1770DC. You might be able to get a new Canon 1785IS for this price but its IQ isn't quite as good as the Sigmas stated (I have the 1785IS currently), at least not at the wide end of things. Tamron is coming out with their 1750f2.8 and Tokina with their 1650f2.8, but the latter is going to be later in the year, from what I've heard. There is also Sigma's 18125DC but the IQ is not quite as good as these other options (though it isn't bad by any means; I used to use it).

BTW, some report focusing issues with their 1850EX but given a good copy it's optically the one to beat.
 
If I got the Canon 28-135mm, would it be wise to get another cheap-ish lens that is someplace between 10-20mm?
 
When I started out in photography all I had was a 50 1.7 and it was great. I didn't buy a new lens for years. (being only 12 years old also didn't help) Anyway, why not stick with a good prime and work on your skills with those limitation?
--

 
I would agree with you, but my "learning period" is going to be three weeks, and then I'm going to have about a month of constant photo work. And I'll be in unpredictable and uncontrolled environments.

However, could you recommend a couple prime lenses? Thank you! All recommendations are much appreciated.
 
i was thinking about the 85 1.8 as a good starting place. it seems to have quite a following on these boards and can be found new for a little over $300. you could add the 50 1.8 and still be below $400.

a zoom would be alot more flexible for "unpredictable" situations but you'll probably find more artistic value in a fast prime.
 
adorecm said:
If I got the Canon 28-135mm, would it be wise to get another
cheap-ish lens that is someplace between 10-20mm?
Click to expand...
I have the 28-135 IS and the Sigma 15-30 EX. Since I have a 10D, I can't use EF-S lenses, and I bought my lenses before any good DC lenses hit the markets. The upside of this combo is that they are full frame 35mm lenses and I use them occasionally on my film camera. At some point, when the 35mm digital format is more affordable (maybe when a used 5D or 1Ds sells for

Now to answer your question, 28mm is a little on the normal side on a 1.6x camera. If you really want wide angles, I would say that the 17-85 IS is more appropriate. It really depends if you want the 17-28mm range more than the 85-135mm range. Both lenses are close optically. If you really want the 10-20mm range, you have a few choices, but they are all expensive ($500+ new):

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=search&Q=&ci=12039&al=695_6140&bl=0&sb=ps&sq=desc&fi=USA

-Mike
http://demosaic.blogspot.com
 
I understand, but I would still look into primes since going cheap on zoom will kill image quality. Even a no L prime will look better than a cheap zoom. 50 1.4 or 1.8, 85 1.8, and even the 35 2.0 would be nice. $75 for the 50 1.8, $220 for the 35 2.0 and $330 for the 85 1.8. All would be better than a non L zoom.
--

 
I have the Sigma 18-200mm and like it a lot. Before buying it, I read over 100 user comments about this lens as compared to the Tamron 18-200. Overall, users preferred the Sigma to the Tamron. To date, I have not had any issues or problems with the Sigma 18-200mm.

One thing to keep in mine. Since this is a very wide range lens, you will be compromising some at both the 18mm & 200mm ranges. For me, the Sigma lens is more than satisfactory. It's a keeper. Great walk around lens.
 
You could probably pick up one of the "kit" lenses either used or new, I've seen a lot of them go up for sale. That would address the wider end of the range. I haven't looked on E bay for awhile, but I've had one of the 28/135's for years, and when I use it, I get good results. I can't speak for the "kit" lenses, I've never used one, but I'd bet they are capable of good results also. Good luck with your decisions!
--
Mike D
http://www.pbase.com/miked
 
adorecm said:
Hello,

I'm going to be purchasing a Canon 350D/XT in a couple weeks, and I
need some help selecting a lens.

My budget allows for about $300 to be spent on a lens (this price
is, however, flexible to some degree....$450 perhaps).

This lens will be used for a scholarly project, and I will taking
pictures of these things: large ships (oil tankers specifically),
oil refineries, landscapes (all over the Western U.S., mostly in
Alaska and California), people, town-scapes, fast moving cars,
airplanes, and many other small and large objects.

I'm very confused as to what Focal Length I need -- I assume an
all-around zoom lens (i.e. 20-100?) would be most functional? Any
recommendations would be much appreciated.

Also, since I'm a beginner and will have a steep learning curve,
would I be better off with an Image Stabilized (IS) lens?

Additionally, I do have access to a 28-80mm lens from Canon EOS
2000 Kit -- I'm not sure if it has the same mount, however.
Click to expand...
yeah that works fine.

tamron 28-75 is great, surely better that canon one you mention. however, it does not get truly wide, nor have all the much tele-reach. I might get the XT with kit lens for wide, use the 28-80 for mid-range and then buy some kind of long zoom, of course none of those will be optimal quality by any means, so perhaps tamron 28-75 for a superb, but small range of coverage, or maybe one of those 18-200 do all zooms, will sacrifice quality but at least get widest of landscapes to airplanes and stuff not looking like little dots.
 
brent collins said:
I understand, but I would still look into primes since going cheap
on zoom will kill image quality. Even a no L prime will look
better than a cheap zoom. 50 1.4 or 1.8, 85 1.8, and even the 35
2.0 would be nice. $75 for the 50 1.8, $220 for the 35 2.0 and
$330 for the 85 1.8. All would be better than a non L zoom.
--

Click to expand...
tamron 28-75 holds up reasonably well and has more range.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Scottelly
2 Lens Kit For fp L
Replies
6
Views
9K
Ceistinne
Ceistinne
D
EF 70-200 f/4L IS ii vs EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L for 5D IV?
Replies
13
Views
23K
Tannin
T
S
Buying cheaper grey market lenses - AF-P 70-300 4.5-5.6E lens
Replies
11
Views
15K
sirhawkeye64
S
P
Which 35mm lens?
Replies
7
Views
4K
chrisD46
C
P
2nd hand Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm f/2.8-4 E VR dull colors?
Replies
7
Views
3K
GarysInSoCal
GarysInSoCal

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top