A Budget Canon System for Newbie

[dundee]

this is pretty unrealistic... under $300? I think we will be unhappy with the lenses mentioned so far..... in the long run. ;p

Anyway, if you have no $$ then get a cheap body IMHO no point stinging on the lens. Then after that get a good normal prime. 35L anyone? :bsmilie: This will keep u sattisfied for a long, long time.

 

[TrailsofLife]

this is pretty unrealistic... under $300? I think we will be unhappy with the lenses mentioned so far..... in the long run. ;p

Anyway, if you have no $$ then get a cheap body IMHO no point stinging on the lens. Then after that get a good normal prime. 35L anyone? :bsmilie: This will keep u sattisfied for a long, long time.

Hey dude, if you have no suggestion, just leave this thread alone. You are not helping. ;(

 

[mervlam]

Hey dude, if you have no suggestion, just leave this thread alone. You are not helping. ;(

friend, what he just said is very true.

$500 is a more realistic budget to start with. you are buying into a photography system, not just lenses and bodies. it's also the bags, basic filters, etc.

 

[dkw]

friend, what he just said is very true.

$500 is a more realistic budget to start with. you are buying into a photography system, not just lenses and bodies. it's also the bags, basic filters, etc.

Agreed twice over . If you don't feel you can splurge on lenses, better off buying a P&S, will get you better image quality.

 

[TrailsofLife]

GUys, just suggest cheap good lens, ok? To help newbie like me, there are people who cannot afford expensive lens. :cry:

 

[TrailsofLife]

friend, what he just said is very true.

$500 is a more realistic budget to start with. you are buying into a photography system, not just lenses and bodies. it's also the bags, basic filters, etc.

For those things, maybe can start another thread? This thread just for suggestion for cheap good lens. O.K?
Thank You

 

[PandaOng]

Hi all,
I think what Max want is to help those pple that has just got into photography (newbies). They might want to practice on the focal range i.e from a wide angle to some tele range. Getting those really good and expensive lens will really burn a hole in their pocket. So a suggested list here will actually help those who wants to get a 'starter' lens to understand the characteristic of the focal length before they invest in Pro lens.

just my 2 newbie cents worth.:thumbsup:

 

[+evenstar]

Prime:
Canon 50mm f1.8 (easy one $135 ) SHARP!
Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro ($280)

Standard Zoom:
Tele Zoom:Canon's old 70-210mm f4 ($???) Good: Pictures are sharp and constant f4,
Bad: push/pull design and AF rather slow!
Canon EF 28-105 USM 3.5-4.5 (New or 2nd hand @ $280)
Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 ($140+) better than canon kit lens.
Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 MACRO Asp HF (about$180) OK, better than kit lens.

Wide Zoom:
Cosina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $250) Sharp for its range, nice color.
Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $199)

Tele Zoom:
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Super II ($330) Better than Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III

 

[CYRN]

If you are using flim... then the list would be suitable...

else if using ef-s mount (assuming budget cam like 300D)... I'd stick to kit lens and Sigma 70-300 for a complete budget setup and if you need a fast lens add a 50mm f1.8.

actually what I really wanted to recommend is 28-135 IS USM or it's ef-s cousin... but that's beyond the stated budget. all-in-one lens.

 

[clay_biscuit]

Thanks Max 2.8! I am a newie and I find the thread very useful!

 

[mpenza]

If you are using flim... then the list would be suitable...

else if using ef-s mount (assuming budget cam like 300D)... I'd stick to kit lens and Sigma 70-300 for a complete budget setup and if you need a fast lens add a 50mm f1.8.

that's exactly what I got too initially ;p

 

[nightwolf75]

Prime:
Canon 50mm f1.8 (easy one $135 ) SHARP!
Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro ($280)

Standard Zoom:
Tele Zoom:Canon's old 70-210mm f4 ($???) Good: Pictures are sharp and constant f4,
Bad: push/pull design and AF rather slow!
Canon EF 28-105 USM 3.5-4.5 (New or 2nd hand @ $280)
Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 ($140+) better than canon kit lens.
Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 MACRO Asp HF (about$180) OK, better than kit lens.
EF 28-90mm f4-5.6 USM - cheap plastic kit lens ($50-$90, old)

Wide Zoom:
Cosina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $250) Sharp for its range, nice color.
Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $199)
Tamron 19-35mm f3.504.5 (think its otherwise known as the Plastic Fantastic) - $250 (old from P&G, cheaper if u get it on B&S)

Tele Zoom:
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Super II ($330) Better than Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III
EF 75-300mm USM III (even tho its quite soft on the extremes, most newbies i know started off with this lens) - $120 (old)




just to add on to +evenstar's list. ;p

 

[moos blues]

I'll bet on the 28-105 MK II USM. Never failed me. I've used it for macros to streets, light, compact built IMHO better than the D70Kit lens. 3.5 is not that slow.

Not sure if the arguement of cheaper prices for newbies is a good one. I can only say cheap is not the best solution. Photography is expensive, I say invest in a decent lens (NOT L all the time), stick with it, den move on. Don't start out collecting focal ranges from 19mm to 300mm, I find that learning to work around the limitations that i have, is the biggest plus point of starting out.

Cosina is cheap, but do you really want to use a cosina, there are decent ones i hope, but many are quite bad :sweat:

Other lenses:
EF 70-300 II USM, happen to have this lens with me, and it was my only tele, but the pictures it took still made it into the papers. I use to take butts with it too... (Butterfly lah)

Saw an old 17-40 Sigma 2.8 - 4 on sale in buy and sell $400, looks decent.

Just sold off 19-35 Tokina, it was a good lens I found it acceptably sharp. Well built it's sturdy and does not feel cheap

50mm 1.8 we all swear by that...
85mm 1.8
90mm Tamron Macro Non-Di (It's a steal)

70-210 3.5-4.5
100-300 4.5-5.6
300mm F4 Sigma/Tokina
200-400mm Tamron i think


most lenses have a sweet spot at F5.6 to F8 and if it's digital, you're going to post process it anyway.. so don't worry so much about a Fast lens. as for AF even lenses without USM are acceptably fast now a days. Last thing i think i want to say is get a cheaper body as it is the same film that you put in it at the end of the day. I use to trick my EOS500N into metering exposures off pavements and etc.

 

[Prismatic]

A bit off-the line here.
When I first started out 8 years ago, All I had was the Tamron 28-200. At that time, it was going for $520 or so. Though it's above the $300 budget line, it can easily cover the range of 3 lenses.

Optics-wise, it's a bit soft but colour and contrast-wise it's still okay. It's a good lense for people wanting to try out all the different ranges without having to buy separate lenses.

A lot of people tend to advise not to save on the lenses, but I guess this thread is for people wanting to get into the hobby without having to spend too much. Besides, spending money on a better lenses dun necessarily gives a better picture. There are a lot of things that makes a better picture other then sharpness, contrast and clarity. Some photographers will tell you how they have benefited on limited equipment.

 

[TrailsofLife]

Please start your chat and personal view in other threads, this thread is purely to create a list of cheaper options to good lens for newbie.

I use to have a 28-200 too. I started there and then slowing move on to 28-135 which is my fav range so far. Guess everyone have to go through this stage to appreciate and differentiate quallity of lenses.:bsmilie:

Lastly, what's trash to one, maybe treasure to others.

Cheers

 

[TrailsofLife]

A bit off-the line here.
When I first started out 8 years ago, All I had was the Tamron 28-200. At that time, it was going for $520 or so. Though it's above the $300 budget line, it can easily cover the range of 3 lenses.

Optics-wise, it's a bit soft but colour and contrast-wise it's still okay. It's a good lense for people wanting to try out all the different ranges without having to buy separate lenses.

A lot of people tend to advise not to save on the lenses, but I guess this thread is for people wanting to get into the hobby without having to spend too much. Besides, spending money on a better lenses dun necessarily gives a better picture. There are a lot of things that makes a better picture other then sharpness, contrast and clarity. Some photographers will tell you how they have benefited on limited equipment.

Well said dude. Not everyone needs L lens.

My suppliers (well-known pro-photographers in advertising industry) always says, its not the camera, its the photographer.
:bsmilie:

 

[jsbn]

Well, here's my setup:

1) Canon 300D ($1750)
2) EF-S 18-55mm f/3.6-5.6 (kit lens, comes with my 300D)
3) EF 50mm f/1.8 ($120)
4) Tokina 24-200mm f/3.6-5.6 ($445)

Whilst the EF-S lens does a great job at scenery photos, it isn't really wide enuff for me, a little slow, a little soft and of cos, a little CA-ing especially in daylight shots. But then it's the range of the lens that I kept it and had not sold.

The Tokina is good as a walkabout lens for travel. A little to the slow side and of cos, its tough, heavy and built like a T72 Tank or a B52 Bomber, dat's da best I can afford. I swear it can kill ppl.

The 50mm f/1.8 is my personal favourite. Fast, cheap, sharp, light and small. Its excellent for those portrait or studio shots given the 1.6 crop factor of the 300D, 10D and 20D. At least for me though.

And now.... for my 17-40 f/4L... No moola.... *sob*

 

[akdwivedi]

Prime:
Canon 50mm f1.8 (easy one $135 ) SHARP!
Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro ($280)

Standard Zoom:
Tele Zoom:Canon's old 70-210mm f4 ($???) Good: Pictures are sharp and constant f4,
Bad: push/pull design and AF rather slow!
Canon EF 28-105 USM 3.5-4.5 (New or 2nd hand @ $280)
Sigma 28-105 UC 4-5.6 (used @100 - good build and AF, optics as good as canon 28-105)
Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 ($140+) better than canon kit lens.
Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 MACRO Asp HF (about$180) OK, better than kit lens.
EF 28-90mm f4-5.6 USM - cheap plastic kit lens ($50-$90, old)

Wide Zoom:
Cosina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $250) Sharp for its range, nice color.
Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $199)
Tamron 19-35mm f3.504.5 (think its otherwise known as the Plastic Fantastic) - $250 (old from P&G, cheaper if u get it on B&S)

Tele Zoom:
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Super II ($330) Better than Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III
EF 75-300mm USM III (even tho its quite soft on the extremes, most newbies i know started off with this lens) - $120 (old)

 

[roon2c]

Prime:
Canon 50mm f1.8 (easy one $135 ) SHARP!
Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro ($280)

Standard Zoom:
Tele Zoom:Canon's old 70-210mm f4 ($???) Good: Pictures are sharp and constant f4,
Bad: push/pull design and AF rather slow!
Canon EF 28-105 USM 3.5-4.5 (New or 2nd hand @ $280)
Sigma 28-105 UC 4-5.6 (used @100 - good build and AF, optics as good as canon 28-105)
Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 ($140+) better than canon kit lens.
Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 MACRO Asp HF (about$180) OK, better than kit lens.
EF 28-90mm f4-5.6 USM - cheap plastic kit lens ($50-$90, old)

Wide Zoom:
Cosina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $250) Sharp for its range, nice color.
Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $199)
Tamron 19-35mm f3.504.5 (think its otherwise known as the Plastic Fantastic) - $250 (old from P&G, cheaper if u get it on B&S)
Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 DC ($180-200 new) For the price paid, it's a pretty sharp and versatile lens. Good CA control and barrel distortion is quite minimum. Noisy AF and some flare issues cause the hood supplied it a bit short

Tele Zoom:
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Super II ($330) Better than Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III
EF 75-300mm USM III (even tho its quite soft on the extremes, most newbies i know started off with this lens) - $120 (old)

 

[TrailsofLife]

Prime:
Canon 50mm f1.8 (easy one $135 ) SHARP!
Cosina 100mm f/3.5 macro ($280)

Standard Zoom:
Tamron 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 ($140+) better than canon kit lens.
Sigma 28-80mm f3.5-5.6 MACRO Asp HF (about$180) OK, better than kit lens.
EF 28-90mm f4-5.6 USM - cheap plastic kit lens ($50-$90, old)
Canon EF 28-105 USM 3.5-4.5(2nd hand-$250) overprice, if compare sharpness, with other similar products
Sigma 28-105 f3.5-4.5(used-$100) Ok if you don't use it wide open.

Wide Zoom:
Cosina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $250) Sharp for its range, nice color.
Tokina 19-35mm f3.5-5.6 (about $199)
Tamron 19-35mm f3.504.5 (think its otherwise known as the Plastic Fantastic) - $250
Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 DC ($180-200 new) Sharp and versatile lens. Good CA control and barrel distortion minimum. Noisy AF, flare issues, hood too short

Tele Zoom:
Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 LD Macro ($290+) Better than Canon 75-300 f4-5.6 USMIII
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Super II ($330) Better than Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 USM III
Tele Zoom:Canon's old 70-210mm f4 ($???) Good: Pictures are sharp and constant f4
EF 75-300mm USM III (don't buy new ones, just get a 2nd hand one from B&S if you only want canon brand)- $100 (old)

I edited the list as the critics is getting longer. Really appreciate if you guys keep it short and sharp. If you want to tell us your photographic experience and history, please kindly start another thread. Happy to see the list growing. Thankyou to all those that contributed to the list. Cheers