Reading mode: Light Dark

Lens Quality for the Rebel D...

Go to last post
F

Forrest41926

Forum Pro
Messages
14,666
Reaction score
112
Location
Seattle, WA, US
So far, the Digital Rebel promises to be a great camera and a fantastic bargain. It's drawing a lot of people into the dSLR arena who have so far only been using digital point-and-shoots, or 35 mm film. ( Either a different system -- like Minolta -- or 35 mm P&S. ) Naturally, a 75+ lens catalogue and a new "format" takes a while to get a handle on. I've seen a lot of questions and some misconceptions around here ... so here's my perspective on it:
  • Canon and Sigma and Nikon and Olympus and Zeiss and ... make some fantastic lenses. They also make some duds. The brand name printed on the barrel doesn't tell you a whole lot about the image quality, and neither does the price, much of the time.
  • IS is the best thing since sliced bread ... if you take advantage of it. It won't stop your subject from moving. It won't magically stop your camera shake and give you perfectly sharp images, either ... but it goes a long way to help with that.
  • Most lenses are at their best ( sharpest, best contrast, least CA... ) at f/8. In fact, a cheapo lens at f/8 could very well make better pictures than a great lens wide-open. Having IS ( like in the 28-135 & 75-300 ) can help you get to f/8, and so can the exceptional high ISO performance in the 10D ... which the Digital Rebel is likely to share.
  • If you're coming from a digital P&S, the large sensor means very narrow DOF. You don't need the f/2 or f/2.8 lens you're used to; shoot a tight portrait, and you can throw the background out of focus at f/5.6 or even f/8.
  • Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have faster / brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At $60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner; it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.
  • Manual focus!! This wasn't really possible with the Olympus 2100 I stepped up to my D60 from, nowadays MF works in a pinch when AF can't keep up. The picture at the bottom of this thread is a good example; AF was too slow and doesn't track flying insects terribly well, so I used MF instead.
  • Finally, a lot of the people who post in these forums have some pretty extreme uses / needs for their gear. A lot of this is pretty unique, and doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people. You don't need thousands of dollars worth of glass to be happy.
 
Forrest said:
So far, the Digital Rebel promises to be a great camera and a
fantastic bargain. It's drawing a lot of people into the dSLR
arena who have so far only been using digital point-and-shoots, or
35 mm film. ( Either a different system -- like Minolta -- or 35
mm P&S. ) Naturally, a 75+ lens catalogue and a new "format" takes
a while to get a handle on. I've seen a lot of questions and some
misconceptions around here ... so here's my perspective on it:
  • Canon and Sigma and Nikon and Olympus and Zeiss and ... make some
fantastic lenses. They also make some duds. The brand name
printed on the barrel doesn't tell you a whole lot about the image
quality, and neither does the price, much of the time.
  • IS is the best thing since sliced bread ... if you take advantage
of it. It won't stop your subject from moving. It won't magically
stop your camera shake and give you perfectly sharp images, either
... but it goes a long way to help with that.
  • Most lenses are at their best ( sharpest, best contrast, least
CA... ) at f/8. In fact, a cheapo lens at f/8 could very well make
better pictures than a great lens wide-open. Having IS ( like in
the 28-135 & 75-300 ) can help you get to f/8, and so can the
exceptional high ISO performance in the 10D ... which the Digital
Rebel is likely to share.
  • If you're coming from a digital P&S, the large sensor means very
narrow DOF. You don't need the f/2 or f/2.8 lens you're used to;
shoot a tight portrait, and you can throw the background out of
focus at f/5.6 or even f/8.
  • Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have
faster / brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all
primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At
$60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner;
it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.
  • Manual focus!! This wasn't really possible with the Olympus 2100
I stepped up to my D60 from, nowadays MF works in a pinch when AF
can't keep up. The picture at the bottom of this thread is a good
example; AF was too slow and doesn't track flying insects terribly
well, so I used MF instead.
  • Finally, a lot of the people who post in these forums have some
pretty extreme uses / needs for their gear. A lot of this is
pretty unique, and doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people.
You don't need thousands of dollars worth of glass to be happy.

Click to expand...
 
Sam Berry said:
Forrest said:
So far, the Digital Rebel promises to be a great camera and a
fantastic bargain. It's drawing a lot of people into the dSLR
arena who have so far only been using digital point-and-shoots, or
35 mm film. ( Either a different system -- like Minolta -- or 35
mm P&S. ) Naturally, a 75+ lens catalogue and a new "format" takes
a while to get a handle on. I've seen a lot of questions and some
misconceptions around here ... so here's my perspective on it:
  • Canon and Sigma and Nikon and Olympus and Zeiss and ... make some
fantastic lenses. They also make some duds. The brand name
printed on the barrel doesn't tell you a whole lot about the image
quality, and neither does the price, much of the time.
  • IS is the best thing since sliced bread ... if you take advantage
of it. It won't stop your subject from moving. It won't magically
stop your camera shake and give you perfectly sharp images, either
... but it goes a long way to help with that.
  • Most lenses are at their best ( sharpest, best contrast, least
CA... ) at f/8. In fact, a cheapo lens at f/8 could very well make
better pictures than a great lens wide-open. Having IS ( like in
the 28-135 & 75-300 ) can help you get to f/8, and so can the
exceptional high ISO performance in the 10D ... which the Digital
Rebel is likely to share.
  • If you're coming from a digital P&S, the large sensor means very
narrow DOF. You don't need the f/2 or f/2.8 lens you're used to;
shoot a tight portrait, and you can throw the background out of
focus at f/5.6 or even f/8.
  • Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have
faster / brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all
primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At
$60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner;
it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.
  • Manual focus!! This wasn't really possible with the Olympus 2100
I stepped up to my D60 from, nowadays MF works in a pinch when AF
can't keep up. The picture at the bottom of this thread is a good
example; AF was too slow and doesn't track flying insects terribly
well, so I used MF instead.
  • Finally, a lot of the people who post in these forums have some
pretty extreme uses / needs for their gear. A lot of this is
pretty unique, and doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people.
You don't need thousands of dollars worth of glass to be happy.

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Forrest said:
  • Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have
faster / brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all
primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At
$60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner;
it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.
Click to expand...
Whenever I see a post like this about the 50 f1.8 I always feel compelled to amend it to read "superb FOR THE PRICE." It might be sharp but it is also is susceptible to flare; out-of-focus highlights are pentagons, not circles; and the build quality is what you would expect from a lens of that price. I have the 50mm f1.4. Since it is not an "L" it is still susceptible to flare but compared to the 1.8 the highlights are rounder and the build quality is better. The "L" zooms use better glass so although they might not be quite as sharp as a prime they will show better color/contrast and will control flare much better. I'm not saying don't get the 1.8, but I am saying $75 does not buy you an "L" lens.
 
Tom O'Neil said:
Whenever I see a post like this about the 50 f1.8 I always feel
compelled to amend it to read "superb FOR THE PRICE." It might be
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree with everything you've said. In fact, I have the 50/1.4 myself, for the reasons you pointed out, but mostly because of the USM motor / full-time manual focus override feature. This alone is worth the price difference to me ... but not to everyone, or everywhere; that price difference is a lot steeper across the pond.
Tom O'Neil said:
sharp but it is also is susceptible to flare; out-of-focus
highlights are pentagons, not circles; and the build quality is
what you would expect from a lens of that price. I have the 50mm
f1.4. Since it is not an "L" it is still susceptible to flare but
compared to the 1.8 the highlights are rounder and the build
quality is better. The "L" zooms use better glass so although they
might not be quite as sharp as a prime they will show better
color/contrast and will control flare much better. I'm not saying
don't get the 1.8, but I am saying $75 does not buy you an "L" lens.
Click to expand...
 
Great post, one quibble though. Rather than f/8 I believe the old maxim is the sweet spot is usually 2 or 3 stops down from the maximum aperture. Otherwise I'd be out of luck with my Nikon 300m which has maximum aperture of f/9.
Forrest said:
  • Most lenses are at their best ( sharpest, best contrast, least
CA... ) at f/8. In fact, a cheapo lens at f/8 could very well make
better pictures than a great lens wide-open. Having IS ( like in
the 28-135 & 75-300 ) can help you get to f/8, and so can the
exceptional high ISO performance in the 10D ... which the Digital
Rebel is likely to share.
Click to expand...
 
Forrest said:
  • Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have
faster / brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all
primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At
$60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner;
it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.
Click to expand...
Thank you Forrest - it's guys like you that make weeding through the dRTF (Digital Rebel Talk Forum) worth the effort. I understand that the 1.4 has a metal vice plastic mount and USM but I feel confident (with so much else to buy) that the 1.8 will give me much pleasure during my foray into SLR photography. I even bought it today on the off hand chance that it may become an out of stock item later! Thanks again - m²
 
Petteri Sulonen said:
Could I edit this and put it up on my website for future reference?
With your byline, of course.
Click to expand...
With a byline, sure ... and maybe a link? I have confidence in your writing skill and unbiased approach to photography, that you won't butcher my comments.

By the way, you should be proud to know that I've edited my 16-35L review, and included a link to your ( excellent ) 17/3.5 review. This is the only external link I have in my entire site.

( That's going to change, down the line, when I have time to create a links section. I'd like to include links for my viewers to the National Park Service, Sierra Club, and so on. )
 
Garrett Adams said:
Great post, one quibble though. Rather than f/8 I believe the old
maxim is the sweet spot is usually 2 or 3 stops down from the
maximum aperture. Otherwise I'd be out of luck with my Nikon 300m
which has maximum aperture of f/9.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think both of these are the old maxim. People usually say two to three stops down, but they also say "f/8 and be there."

In reality, most of the rules of thumb ( ) are so generalized as to be almost meaningless. We know the 1/3 vs 2/3 DOF rule only applies when you're focused toward infinity; for macros it's more like 1/2 and 1/2. I think the sweet spot of a lens is also a bit overgeneralized; the 200/1.8L is as sharp at f/1.8 as it is at f/8, and so on.

But these "rules" became accepted because it takes hundreds of photos to prove/disprove something like this, especially when it takes days or weeks to see the results of your experiments. Quite cost-prohibative.

Nowadays, though, someone can take a few dozen shots with slightly different settings in each one, and see for themselves -- immediately -- how it works. All this costs is an hour of your time, and a little wear on a shutter that should last 60,000 or more exposures.

So people can find out for themselves where their lenses are sharpest and most contrasty, then do what they can to use their lenses at their sweet spots.
  • Off topic, but do you know the ( sinister ) history of this phrase?
 
Mark Marshall said:
Thank you Forrest - it's guys like you that make weeding through
the dRTF (Digital Rebel Talk Forum) worth the effort. I understand
that the 1.4 has a metal vice plastic mount and USM but I feel
confident (with so much else to buy) that the 1.8 will give me much
pleasure during my foray into SLR photography. I even bought it
today on the off hand chance that it may become an out of stock
item later! Thanks again - m²
Click to expand...
This is true ( about the mount ), but at $60 or so, if the lens falls apart after a few years, it's not really such a big deal.

There are several other reasons to go with the 50/1.4 over the 50/1.8, but all of them are kind of essoteric, and if you don't already know why you need the f/1.4 version, you're probably better off with your $200 than you would be with the brighter lens.
 
Forrest wrote:
[snip]

I tried sending this by e-mail, but your mailserver bounced the message, so sorry 'bout the inconvenience, everyone. :-)

I had to scale down your photo to 500 px wide, to fit it in my web page format, but IMO it didn't suffer too badly.

What do you think about adding a final point along the lines of:

"Photographing with an SLR is at the same time challenging and enormously rewarding. If you're new to it, you might feel overwhelmed, and it'll probably take you a while to get the results you want consistently. Stick with it and enjoy the learning experience. You're in for a lot of fun."

It's not strictly about lenses, I know, but I think it'd wrap it up nicely.

The edited text is below. Is it acceptable? The link would go around "Valhalla Photos".

Petteri

-- BEGIN TEXT --
Lens Lore for Newbies

Text and photo (c) Forrest Croce. Used with permission.
Please visit his website at Valhalla Photos!

Canon's Digital Rebel promises to be a great camera and a
fantastic bargain. It's drawing a lot of people into the dSLR
arena who have so far only been using digital point-and-shoots, or
35 mm film. Many are migrating from other lens systems, or have never

had to think seriously about lens choice before. A 75+ lens catalogue and a new "format" takes
a while to get a handle on. I've seen a lot of questions and some
misconceptions about the subject... so here's my perspective on it.

+ Canon and Sigma and Nikon and Olympus and Zeiss and the rest make some
fantastic lenses. They also make some duds. The brand name
printed on the barrel doesn't tell you a whole lot about the image
quality, and neither does the price, much of the time.

+ Image Stabilization (IS) is the best thing since sliced bread, but
only if you learn to use it to your advantage. It won't stop your
subject from moving. It won't magically stop your camera shake and
give you perfectly sharp images, either... but it goes a long way to help.

+ Most lenses are at their best (sharpest, best contrast, least

CA and other undesirables) around f/8. In fact, a cheapo lens at f/8 could very well make
better pictures than a great lens wide-open. Having IS ( like in

the 28-135/3.5-5.6IS and the 75-300/4-5.6IS ) can help you get to f/8, and so can the
exceptional high ISO performance in the Canon DSLR's.

+ If you're coming from a digital P&S, the large sensor means very
narrow depth of field. You don't need the f/2 or f/2.8 lens you're used to;
shoot a tight portrait, and you can throw the background out of
focus at f/5.6 or even f/8.

+ Don't rule out primes! They cost less than zooms, usually have
brighter apertures, they weigh a lot less, and almost all
primes are going to be sharper than the zooms in their range. At
$60 to $75, the superb 50/1.8 is a must for any Rebel D owner;
it's sharper and faster than the best and most expensive L zooms.

+ Manual focus! This wasn't really possible with the Olympus 2100
I stepped up to my D60 from, but nowadays MF works in a pinch when AF
can't keep up. The picture below is a good
example; AF was too slow and doesn't track flying insects terribly
well, so I used MF instead.

+ Finally, a lot of the people who post in these forums have some
pretty extreme uses and needs for their gear. A lot of this is
pretty unique, and doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people.
You don't need thousands of dollars worth of glass to be happy.

--



Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]
 
Petteri Sulonen said:
I tried sending this by e-mail, but your mailserver bounced the
message, so sorry 'bout the inconvenience, everyone. :-)
Click to expand...
Really...? I'm going to have to look into this. Did you use the address I have listed here, or the one on my server? Did you include a large attachment?
Petteri Sulonen said:
I had to scale down your photo to 500 px wide, to fit it in my web
page format, but IMO it didn't suffer too badly.
Click to expand...
If you'd like, I can reprocess it for you ... but without having had a chance to look at it, I'm sure you did a good job. Your site is filled with excellent photos that also happened to be processed very well.
Petteri Sulonen said:
What do you think about adding a final point along the lines of:
Click to expand...
Petteri Sulonen said:
"Photographing with an SLR is at the same time challenging and
enormously rewarding. If you're new to it, you might feel
overwhelmed, and it'll probably take you a while to get the results
you want consistently. Stick with it and enjoy the learning
experience. You're in for a lot of fun."
Click to expand...
In this case you might want to go just a tad further ... since you're already adding another paragraph. For example, when my D60 arrived, I left it in jpeg mode for quite a while, until I had learned the camera , and then I began tackling the software, RAW conversions, and things like that. Like you said, it can be overwhelming ... but you can make it less so; divide and conquer!

Anyway, that last point is up to you, but if you agree, I think you'll be able to word it a little better.
Petteri Sulonen said:
It's not strictly about lenses, I know, but I think it'd wrap it up
nicely.
Click to expand...
I completely agree!
Petteri Sulonen said:
The edited text is below. Is it acceptable? The link would go
around "Valhalla Photos".
Click to expand...
Thanks very much!!
 
Forrest said:
Forrest41926 said:
I tried sending this by e-mail, but your mailserver bounced the
message, so sorry 'bout the inconvenience, everyone. :-)
Click to expand...
Really...? I'm going to have to look into this. Did you use the
address I have listed here, or the one on my server? Did you
include a large attachment?
Click to expand...
The one here, and no attachments.

I've mailed you the headers... to the other addy. Looks like it bounced at excite.com.
Forrest41926 said:
Forrest41926 said:
I had to scale down your photo to 500 px wide, to fit it in my web
page format, but IMO it didn't suffer too badly.
Click to expand...
If you'd like, I can reprocess it for you ... but without having
had a chance to look at it, I'm sure you did a good job. Your site
is filled with excellent photos that also happened to be
processed very well.
Click to expand...
Thanks. The downsample was so minor that nothing much needed to be done to it, Bicubic worked just fine. :-)
Forrest41926 said:
Forrest41926 said:
What do you think about adding a final point along the lines of:
Click to expand...
Forrest41926 said:
"Photographing with an SLR is at the same time challenging and
enormously rewarding. If you're new to it, you might feel
overwhelmed, and it'll probably take you a while to get the results
you want consistently. Stick with it and enjoy the learning
experience. You're in for a lot of fun."
Click to expand...
In this case you might want to go just a tad further ... since
you're already adding another paragraph. For example, when my D60
arrived, I left it in jpeg mode for quite a while, until I had
learned the camera , and then I began tackling the software, RAW
conversions, and things like that. Like you said, it can be
overwhelming ... but you can make it less so; divide and conquer!

Anyway, that last point is up to you, but if you agree, I think
you'll be able to word it a little better.
Click to expand...
OK. I'll use the creative license and put it up ASAP. Thanks!

Petteri
--



Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]
 
Petteri Sulonen said:
Please let me know if there's anything you want changed.
Click to expand...
Well, if you could make that hummingbird moth larger in the frame ... just kidding; you did a fantastic job, as expected.

There's just one very minor thing that you might want to clarify; the last point, about people in "these forums" pushing their gear to the limits might be a little confusing. Maybe "web forums" or "Internet forums" or something like that would be more clear? ( Your website doesn't have forums for complaining about backfocus... )

Anyway, don't mind me ... I'm just a perfectionist.
 
Forrest said:
Forrest41926 said:
Please let me know if there's anything you want changed.
Click to expand...
Well, if you could make that hummingbird moth larger in the frame
... just kidding; you did a fantastic job, as expected.

There's just one very minor thing that you might want to clarify;
the last point, about people in "these forums" pushing their gear
to the limits might be a little confusing. Maybe "web forums" or
"Internet forums" or something like that would be more clear? (
Your website doesn't have forums for complaining about backfocus...
)

Anyway, don't mind me ... I'm just a perfectionist.
Click to expand...
I thought I'd already fixed all the references to "these forums" but looks like I missed one. I'll do that ASAP.

Petteri
--



Portfolio: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/index/ ]
Pontification: [ http://www.seittipaja.fi/ ]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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