EOS Revolution
Member
If u got 600-700, then get a second hand tamron 17-50 and perhaps a 55-250
Advice on getting my first lens
- Thread starter demandread
- Start date
- Status
jlkk76
Senior Member
My adv is to get dis 2 good n cheap 2nd hand lens...
Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 (ard $500)
Canon 55-250mm F/4-5.6 IS (ard 300 plus)
good enough for u lor....just blow ur budget abit nia...
From his original plan to get the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, and his question on the issues of apperture. I would like to concur that maybe TS is still quite unsure of the basics of DSLR , but that is of no issue, who dont start off this way?
But I would seriously advice to really try out the 18-55 IS (maybe your friend's is not the new version? ) first. The only issue i have for this lens is that its not fast enough due to its apperture variables , other than that under sufficient lighting its a great lens capable of performing . Its not a waste of money getting it as like what other CSer mentioned you can get it 2nd hand with warrentee at a nice price at the BnS section.. 150 +/- ?
I would think its better to get the basics right to know what you really need, not want
Regards to your issue that there are some shots you cannot get, you got to live with the fact. You CANT get every aspect of shots. Unless you get most of the lens?( thats why canon has such a wide variety of lens You got to see what your lens see and try to compose from it.
Slowly build from it, only if you feel like 50% or more of the time you find your ideal composition too far or wide with your available lens, then you should start researching and thinking what you really need. not want.
Eg. I would surely want to shoot star! So do i get a 800mm ? maybe i should ... even if i shoot it like 1% of my entire shooting time ? :bigeyes: . Very exagerated. But hope you see the picture
Feel free to comment :thumbsup:
EOS Revolution
Member
Actually since TS has a budget of 600-700 and he feels that he needs more reach, i think that he should get the 55-250 and either get a tamron 17-50 (constant aperture of 2.8:thumbsup:, no IS:think
or like u said, the 18-55 IS (variable aperture from 3.5 to 5.6:thumbsd:, got IS:thumbsup ... I find that if u get the 18-55 u are more likely to want to upgrade again in the near future. 17-50 has nicer bokeh, constant aperture, Slightly better build and better IQ.. Up to TS to decide:think:Yeap utimately is up to him to decide .. its his money anyway
But i feel that he should know more to be sure if his money is spent the most appropriate way
Dont just buy and buy and buy because its good or others says its good.
Unless $ factor is not in the brew for you then its okay
EOS Revolution
Member
Yeap utimately is up to him to decide .. its his money anyway
But i feel that he should know more to be sure if his money is spent the most appropriate way
Dont just buy and buy and buy because its good or others says its good.
Unless $ factor is not in the brew for you then its okay
I agree with this. but also try out first cause u may think it is ok now but next time u may want to upgrade more and then end up selling to fund ur new purchase, then in the end u spend more. :thumbsd:
demandread
New Member
Sorry if it sounded that way. I just meant that the ones I read said that there are a lot of better lenses out there than the 18-55mm. I could try to find the reviews before which recommended getting just the body without the lens (and getting a different lens)
From his original plan to get the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, and his question on the issues of apperture. I would like to concur that maybe TS is still quite unsure of the basics of DSLR , but that is of no issue, who dont start off this way?
But I would seriously advice to really try out the 18-55 IS (maybe your friend's is not the new version? ) first. The only issue i have for this lens is that its not fast enough due to its apperture variables , other than that under sufficient lighting its a great lens capable of performing . Its not a waste of money getting it as like what other CSer mentioned you can get it 2nd hand with warrentee at a nice price at the BnS section.. 150 +/- ?
I would think its better to get the basics right to know what you really need, not want
Regards to your issue that there are some shots you cannot get, you got to live with the fact. You CANT get every aspect of shots. Unless you get most of the lens?( thats why canon has such a wide variety of lens You got to see what your lens see and try to compose from it.
Slowly build from it, only if you feel like 50% or more of the time you find your ideal composition too far or wide with your available lens, then you should start researching and thinking what you really need. not want.
Eg. I would surely want to shoot star! So do i get a 800mm ? maybe i should ... even if i shoot it like 1% of my entire shooting time ? Very exagerated. But hope you see the picture
Feel free to comment :thumbsup:
Yep, my friend's 18-55mm is not the new version (without IS). The dSLR is just 2 weeks old, and upgrade to my PnS and every shot I take is a learning experience. Case to point, I've always thought that IS is a must with my shaky hands but I've now learned to adjust the shutter speed to compensate.
Would you suggest that I defer the purchase of a new (and most likely) expensive lens and get my own 18-55mm (this time with IS) and then find out what I feel I'm missing? I know that I would not get all my shots, but I'm looking for something that would cover more than 50% of my needs (and I do feel the need to increase the range by a little bit right now).
I guess another option would be to borrow the 28-135 from another friend and then try it out and see how I feel with it (and the loss of the 18-28 range). Are there places where you can rent out a lens for a day and try it out?
BTW, i forgot to mention that I also got the 50mm f/1.8 and have used it for low-light photography (though I'm still learning which ISO to use and stuff)
How I wish this was true. Would make life a lot easier
Last edited:
EOS Revolution
Member
demandread
New Member
Yes. just look under the services offered section of clubsnap
Found them, thanks!
Now to find places to try them out :thumbsup:
woeilee
New Member
Hey, why haven't anyone mention about the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens.
Yup it is also one of the kit lenses available and isn't having the best optic around. However its image stablizer and its zoom range (17-85mm) is really useful as a walk-about lens.
Just my 5 cents worth
Yup it is also one of the kit lenses available and isn't having the best optic around. However its image stablizer and its zoom range (17-85mm) is really useful as a walk-about lens.
Just my 5 cents worth
weixiang1900
New Member
Hey, why haven't anyone mention about the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens.
Yup it is also one of the kit lenses available and isn't having the best optic around. However its image stablizer and its zoom range (17-85mm) is really useful as a walk-about lens.
Just my 5 cents worth
the barrel distortion at the wide end is really :thumbsd:
Hey, why haven't anyone mention about the EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens.
Yup it is also one of the kit lenses available and isn't having the best optic around. However its image stablizer and its zoom range (17-85mm) is really useful as a walk-about lens.
Just my 5 cents worth
For its price point, it's easily the most not-worth-it lens on the EF-S line-up. It's about three times as expensive as the cheaper 18-55 IS (that, incidentally, has markedly better optics), and only a better built quality to really justify that hefty price tag.
If you ask me, totally not a good buy.
I also just started out with DSLR photography. Just to share my experiences:
Although I have a 18-55mm IS, I seldom use it, as I never found myself the need to shoot wide angles (yet). My camera is mostly for family/baby shots indoors and thus 50mm f/1.8 is almost exclusively mounted on the camera. I may be getting the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to complement it coz sometimes 50mm is not wide enough. However, large aperture and shallow DOF are impt to me. :bsmilie:
I also have a 28-135mm that I use outdoors as I find it invaluable. Again, I never miss the wide angles so the lens works for me, although I do carry my 18-55mm whereever I go just in case I need it, but so far, never took it out.
The most impt thing you have to ask yourself is what kind of photography will you mainly be doing? Lens is not just abt the range but also the aperture as it affects the "effects" that you want to achieve. Also, since you do not have all the money in the world to get the entire range of lens, it is best to decide the direction you want to go and only buy what you need. Money not easy to earn... :sweat:
One more thing that I learnt from other reviews is that the 18-55mm IS has much better IQ than the older 18-55mm II (with no IS). You may want to try and see if you can borrow one to play around to see if there are differences in the quality of these 2 lenses.
Although I have a 18-55mm IS, I seldom use it, as I never found myself the need to shoot wide angles (yet). My camera is mostly for family/baby shots indoors and thus 50mm f/1.8 is almost exclusively mounted on the camera. I may be getting the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to complement it coz sometimes 50mm is not wide enough. However, large aperture and shallow DOF are impt to me. :bsmilie:
I also have a 28-135mm that I use outdoors as I find it invaluable. Again, I never miss the wide angles so the lens works for me, although I do carry my 18-55mm whereever I go just in case I need it, but so far, never took it out.
The most impt thing you have to ask yourself is what kind of photography will you mainly be doing? Lens is not just abt the range but also the aperture as it affects the "effects" that you want to achieve. Also, since you do not have all the money in the world to get the entire range of lens, it is best to decide the direction you want to go and only buy what you need. Money not easy to earn... :sweat:
One more thing that I learnt from other reviews is that the 18-55mm IS has much better IQ than the older 18-55mm II (with no IS). You may want to try and see if you can borrow one to play around to see if there are differences in the quality of these 2 lenses.
Last edited:
weixiang1900
New Member
tt's why u can see people selling off 17-85mm IS. For me, i will siam this lens big time.. the barrel distortion is like crap, 18-55mm IS is so much better :thumbsup:
woeilee
New Member
Different opinion I guess but it is not in 'totally not a good buy' category. Its zoom range, IS and USM worth that bit to pay for if we are comparing kit lens. For new user, a wider zoom range is my suggestion. Learning the technique is more impt than getting that IQ. By the way, I dont think you can decipher a photo taken by EF-S 17-85mm lens from that by EF-S 17-55mm lens.Just my 5 cents worth.
Big difference 18-55 non IS and with IS.
Just my 5 cents worth.
Unlike your advice, I would actually recommend a lesser zoom range or even to the point of using a prime for beginners. Zoom seriously makes you pretty much lazy and different focal length will create different effect regardless of the composition. As i started out pretty much this year too, since i bought the prime 100 mm i learnt alot more about composition and the difference between the different focal length. When you use zoom lens, sometimes you wont even realise what range are you shooting in, until you reached the max or min or read the exif data
Just my 5 cents worth.
IS for comparison is much of a moot point, and so is USM; both kit lenses have IS, just for your reference, and USM may not necessarily equate to faster focusing. At the end of the day, it's not so much about differentiating between a 17-85 and 17-55 f/2.8. Let me turn that argument on you - is there enough of a difference between the 17-85 and 18-55 IS to justify three times the price?
By the way, I feel that zoom range will cultivate laziness, not so much learning the technique and how does a 17-85 possibly train technique more so than 18-55? Aren't they both lenses?
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
