Best *Canon* lenses <$400?

Thanks for your help, nice to have a choice of two, I guess I
will agonise over which one to get. :-)

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
 
Have you tried your 200/2.8L with 1.4x or 2.0x Tcons?
...I've thought about getting a 1.4 but haven't yet. Others have said that the results are very good though.
 
Thanks!
50 f/1.4 great all around lens
I'll probably save some money/weight and go for the f/1.8.
100 f/2 great for close portraits and candids
Yes, many people seem to recommend it; most popular together
with 85/1.8 and 35/2.0 in this thread.

Would 100mm be enough tele to work well with a tcon?

I notice all lenses but two mentioned so far are primes.
I guess the good Canon zooms are generally more than $400.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
 
I have left the lens on the camera since I purchased it along with
the 30D kit. I took some test shots comparing it to the kit lens,
and I couldn't go back. It's a better lens for all around
applications than the 50mm prime.
I agree, I shoot more around 1.6*35mm than 1.6*50mm with my
current ultrazoom.

Don't you feel limited with just using the prime all the time
(if I understood correctly)?

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
 
Of course there are limitations, but for the money, I'm happy to just use the prime. The real problem is that I bought the 35 f2 at the same time I bought the 30D kit, and took some test shots at various apertures with the kit lens set to 35mm and compared them to ones using the prime. Upon examining the shots, I just couldn't see using the kit lens unless I really had to. I get some walking in when I shoot to get in position, but that doesn't bother me.
--
Steve
 
So you never want to know the IQ of the XT by increasing sharpening and adding a good sharp Canon lens? The moment you get a good Canon lens the cheap lenses you are considering will be instantly a waste of money.

The kit lens will never be sharp even with in camera sharpening and the 50 f1.8 II has terrible pentagon bokeh shapes. Basically you need 2 to 3 good (expensive) lenses to do all your shots.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Landscape-Lens.aspx

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-General-Purpose-Lens.aspx

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Wildlife-Lens.aspx
Hi, please help me with my lens research.

I wonder which lenses below €400 (US$400) from
Canon (not 3rd party) are the most desirable to own
or good value. For use with a 350D/XT. I do landscapes,
some moderate close-up, and birding (yes I know
€400 isn't enough for good birding). I will probably get
the Tokina 12-24/4 some day.

To get two out of the way: I know the 18-55/3.5-5.6 is very
low price and light and the same can be said about the 50/1.8
which is even good optically. But is there anything else I
should keep my eyes on? Thanks.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
--
Torch
 
I'm not sure of the exact price, but the 28-135IS is less than 450, but I don't think its one of the best.

The 100 f2.8 Macro! is right at $450, which is superb from having used it and examples I've seen.
--

'I think Bigfoot is blurry, that's the problem. It's not the photographer's fault. Bigfoot is blurry. And that's extra scary to me, because there's a large, out of focus monster roaming the countryside. Run.'
-Mitch Hedberg

http://www.thoughtpotential.com/gallery
 
3 primes can cover alot of uses, and even be lighter in weight.

The best clarity too, missing only one thing, instant zooming. Some people would sacrifice a tad of clarity for the zooms for that reason. Less likely to miss the shot if you can zoom.

I do mainly zooms, but if I had those three, 35, 60, 100mm That would suffice powerfully so. The teleconverter on the 100, good question. I don't know anyone who has done that. Does the lens allow that? Some aren't compatible. You might look into it before deciding. Get your primes now and maybe after the new lenses come out next month you might opt to add a reduced price 70-200f4. Lots will be for sale due to the new IAS model. Excellent L to compliment your primes, and should drop to around $500 in a few months. [less than $400 Britpd]
--



Linda~ http://sweetlight.yuku.com/
You don't take a photograph. You ask, quietly, to borrow it. Author Unknown
 
85/1.8 sounds very useful,
does it generally focus reliably wide open on a 350D?
I doubt it. From the few weeks I had a 350D, the (to me) most important lesson I learned was that 350D AF and fast lenses used wide open don't work well together.

-- Markus
 
I don't think I said I would get the kit lens. I just wanted it out
of the discussion (without offending anyone by putting it down :-).
[snip] Basically you
need 2 to 3 good (expensive) lenses to do all your shots.
By expensive do you mean above $400?

Considering that "$400" lenses are more like $600 here and that this
is just a hobby for me, I have set that limit to keep some control over
my lens lust. :-)

Thanks for the links, I've read some lens reviews on that site, but I've
somehow missed the summaries/recommendations, I will give them a
read.

Just my two öre
Erik from Sweden
 
if your limit is allowed to 'slip' just a little..

the clear, sharp winner is:
100mm f2.8 macro...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=47&sort=7&cat=2&page=1

many pay close to $400 for it.. I think I paid $450 with no 'deals'..
just look for a deal..

it is one of the sharpest...
it chases my 85L II around the room...

not as fast to focus as some - when set out of range -
but keep the range within your shooting area and it is fine..
http://groups.msn.com/more2tomphotos/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=32

but it really shines in all other respects...CA, sharpness, color/contrast..
and as a walkaround.. having 6" to infinity focus range is truely remarkable...

at any sensor size it is the tops

my vote

TOM
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top