first lens

xirokx

xirokx

xirokx

Soldato
Joined
2 Oct 2004
Posts
4,362
Location
N.W London
Hi,

getting a canon 20d and need a lens dont know which one to go for..

i shoot mainly landscapes, portraits and the odd macro..

also budget is very low..

what can you recommend?

i am inclinced to go for the kits lens 18-55 then move on because I am restricted by budget, what do you guys think? what would you do?
 
xirokx said:
Hi,

getting a canon 20d and need a lens dont know which one to go for..

i shoot mainly landscapes, portraits and the odd macro..

also budget is very low..

what can you recommend?

i am inclinced to go for the kits lens 18-55 then move on because I am restricted by budget, what do you guys think? what would you do?
Click to expand...

the kits lens is quite poor

you will need to let us know your price range in order to spec you a lens
 
for that kind of budget you can get the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS (£90 ish)

I've no idea how good it is but its got to be better than the origional 18-55 non-is kit lens


or the 50mm f1.8 which is excellent value for around £60-70
 
JBuk said:
for that kind of budget you can get the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 IS (£90 ish)

I've no idea how good it is but its got to be better than the origional 18-55 non-is kit lens


or the 50mm f1.8 which is excellent value for around £60-70
Click to expand...

The IS version of the 18-55mm is sharp (it's especially value for money) and couple it with a Raynox 250, you can have macro shots. You can still do relatively good close up shots, the focus distance is only 25cm...

At 18mm, there is distortion but nothing photoshop can't fix. I've been using it so much these days after realising I don't have enough money for better lens. Stick with it till you've saved enough for say a 17-55mm IS :p

See my deviantART page for most of the lens shot (anything shot below 55mm (and not shot at 50mm) is made by that lens.

Here's a macro shot with a Raynox 250 (an adaptor in front of the lens)
Day_083_by_sillyporean.jpg


Here's a landscape
Whitby_Entrance_by_sillyporean.jpg


And a Portrait (I don't take a lot of face up portrait shots, so excuse my example)
Day_073_by_sillyporean.jpg
 
D.P. said:
50mm 1.8. don't bother with anything else until you have more money.
Click to expand...

I agree in terms of price point and how sharp that lens is but for a multi-use landscape, portrait and even micro lens, the 50mm on a cropped sensor isn't as versatile that the 18-55mm IS.

That's how I've come to feel after trying to make the 50mm as my primary lens on camera but often I find myself having to walk really far back to take a portrait/group shot and it's even worst for a landscape shot.
 
D.P. said:
50mm 1.8. don't bother with anything else until you have more money.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more, on a cropped body the 50mm is just to restricting to live with as a single lens solution, I tried and failed on a 30D but find it easy enough on my EOS 300 slr.

Four your budget the IS version of the kit lens is the best thing your going to get. If you could double it you could pick up a second hand Sigma 17-70 which is a cracking lens but thats not really relevant.
 
Canon 18-55 IS recommendation here too. Waaaaaay better than the older Canon 18-55's. Pretty sharp edge to edge and a steal at the price.

gt
 
I know this is over budget but if you can. The Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.5 is going for £175 (sure you can haggle a bit) on talkphotogrpahy forums. Its a cracking lens and has most things covered for what you are looking for.

17mm wide enough for decent landscapes
upto 70mm - good for protraits!
20cm minimum focus distance it can focus nearer, im sure of it however its not a true macro. will do 1/2 lifesize iirc.

I use it all the time it stay on my body most of the time.
 
would you pay £100 for a brand new canon 55-250mm EFS lens??

for landscapes and portraits..sure there is much better but do you guys reckon thats a good price..
 
£100 is a very good price for that lens, not well suited to lanscapes or portraits though. Could always sell it for £150 and use the money torwards something like the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, fast, sharp and fairly cheap (available for £217 delivered, online).
 
xirokx said:
for landscapes and portraits..sure there is much better but do you guys reckon thats a good price..
Click to expand...

As said in your previous thread, great price.
As for Landscape and Portraits, it's pretty much the worst lens you can use for that unless you're standing 5m away when shooting portraits and doing a lot of shots to get a panoramic landscape shot.

Too long.

Raikiri's advice is actually really sound as the 55-250mm can be sold for about 160inc second hand.
 
rakiri, Ive got a budget of £350 - £400 I wanna bid on a 20d with 55-250mm and 18-55mm its gonna go for around £330 I expect..

Is that worth it?

I shoot mainly landscapes or portraits ...

If not, what would you do?

Please help..

Cheers
 
If you can get that for 330 (Which I'll be very surprised), then that will be very good deal. Sell on the 55-250mm whilst you keep the 18-55 (learn, shoot get use to using the camera and know if you need more focal length or are you happy with that range for your portrait and landscape shootings)

And when the 55-250mm finally sells, invest the money to a better lens that's around that focal length - the Tamron and Sigma have lenses at those range with f/2.8, useful for indoors. (or keep the 55-250mm IF you like it)

I emphasise, that's if you do get the kit for 330 - the rule of eBay is, there's always snipers for camera equipments, you'll see it jack up and end more around the 400 mark before it ends (touch wood it doesn't for you :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom