OK, so before I trek out and hit a real photog forum board, I'd like to see what our resident experts here can tell me about lenses for the new XT I have on the way for the wife.

Currently, we use a 35mm film Rebel G with the standard 35-80mm and also an older EOS 80-200mm.  These were lower end lenses about on par with the lens that comes with the XT....

I want to get one very good quality mid range zoom lens.  I don't know enough about the nuances to know what I am even looking for....

A primer would be good.....

Can anyone shed some light on this subject matter????

Quoted: My work horse is the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS. I highly recommend it. I use it with the Digital rebel and the Canon 20D.

Any special features about it, or just the image quality that makes you like it?

Quoted: Has Image stabilization and is a faster lens with the ap. going to 3.5. Its very sharp! Also has a macro setting.

Street Price?

Someone mentioned "L" lenses in another thread.....what is it and what does it add?

Quoted: Quoted: My work horse is the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS. I highly recommend it. I use it with the Digital rebel and the Canon 20D. Any special features about it, or just the image quality that makes you like it?

Main feature is the IS (image stablizer) which allows you to take shots at lower shutter speeds in low light.  F3.5 isn't 'slow' but it isn't fast either so you'll need help to eliminate camera shake.  Basically you will be able to hand-hold more shots than you would on a non-IS lens.  It's also well reguarded as quality goes.  This is one I'd like to have when I get the cash.


Also get the 50mm f1.8 prime.  Compared to any mid price zoom the images it produces are amazing.  Tack sharp and super fast.  I can shoot in very low light with no flash and handhold at f2.0 when other lenses would require a tripod.  It's obvious disadvantage is that it's fixed focal length, and thus it's 'sneaker zoom'.  Also the new version is plastic and cheap feeling.  But I got mine for $50 used and it's my goto portrait lens.  At that price it could be made out of cardboard and paperclips and I'd still buy it.

The mid price zooms ($200 - $500) are a mixed bag but very few will compare with what an expensive quality lens will produce.   My Sigma 24-135mm f2.8 is decent, but it won't stack up next to better glass.  You really have to see side by side images of detail areas to understand.

www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/CAT_3787crx.aspx

There are some other good sites but I can't remember all of them.

Good luck.

tag

I shoot mostly primes, but I do have the Rebel Kit lens (18-55) that I use when I need.  Currently have the 50 F1.8, 85 F1.8 and 200 F2.8.  Would recommend them all for different stuff.  On a full frame, I don't know that I'd use much other than the 85 on there, but that's me.

The lens ILL uses is supposed to be pretty nice.  I have not touched it much.  

Really depends on what you want more...convenience or faster aperature and what not.   I can use my feet for nearly all the pics I take, so 'zooming' isn't too difficult.  

Check fredmiranda.com for reviews on lenses.  They tend to have slightly more plausible reviews.  Some lenses (400 F2.8, 85 F1.2, 50 F1.0 etc.) aren't really practical to read about for most folks that aren't pro.  

Also, if the 80-200mm that you have now is the 80-200 F2.8, it's a good lens.  If not..oh well.  

Just take pics you like and be happy with them.

.

Quoted: Currently have the 50 F1.8

Is this the one:



It lists for about $75-$100????

Also, if the 80-200mm that you have now is the 80-200 F2.8, it's a good lens.  If not..oh well.

Pretty sure the lens is variable F....I'll check it though.

Quoted: Quoted: Currently have the 50 F1.8 Is this the one: www.adorama.com/images/large/CA5018AFU.jpg It lists for about $75-$100????

That's the Mk1 model, which is considered slightly better.  The mk2 is the one that's now for sale, it's got plastic lens mount, but works just fine.  Also skips the distance meter thingy.

Pretty sure the lens is variable F....I'll check it though.

There's a 4-5.6 model out there too, it's a consumer level lens.

Quoted: "L" series lens are higher quality lenses and cost around $1500 and up. They will also stop down to around f/1.5 L stands for Low Distortion.

LD = Low Distortion.  Canon 'L' glass is Luxury...or nothing.

Also, they stop down to F1.0 (50mm F1.0) and F1.2 (85mm).

And the 70-200 F4 can be had for under $700.  New.

Quoted: There's a 4-5.6 model (80-200mm) out there too, it's a consumer level lens.

That's the one.  It's actually 4.5-5.6...

Think I would notice drastically better, sharper, clearer pictures with a better intermediate zoom??  Like the one ILL suggests??

For all around shooting on a digital w/a 1.5-1.6 crop the28-135 IS is pretty sweet.


Excellent quality and versatility for the price

Quoted: Quoted: There's a 4-5.6 model (80-200mm) out there too, it's a consumer level lens. That's the one.  It's actually 4.5-5.6... Think I would notice drastically better, sharper, clearer pictures with a better intermediate zoom??  Like the one ILL suggests??

You might.  Depends what you shoot at and how.  

Really, the answer lies in enlargement.  Once you get past 4x6 you'll probably start to notice real flaws.  Until then...the difference between a shot from a 200 F2.8L and a 200 F5.6 zoom both shot at F8 would probably not start to be noticable to most folks.  Color tones would be most noticable, and edge contrast.  At an 8x10 print, you might notice that there's several folks watching you in the background of the F2.8 shot vs. a few smudges.  etc.

There are several very nice aftermarket lenese out there you might consider as well.
The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 runs about $350 or so and is very sharp and has a great reputation.  The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is also a very sharp lens, though a bit heavier.  I have one and it performs very nicely.  Costs about $400.
For wider angle shots, you might consider the Tokina 12-24, which costs about $500-550.  Has garnered a good reputation in the few months it's been out there.
Where things get expensive is the telephoto zooms.  If you want a GOOD one, you're going to have to spend at least $500---you can get a Canon 70-200 f4L used on places like Fred Miranda forums for around $500.  You can also find deals on used Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses for about $650 usually, and those are also very good.
Anything longer than 200, to get a good lens you're going to have to spend serious bucks.  The best buy in a long telephoto zoom is probably the Sigma 50-500, which can be found used for under $800.  The best buy in a telephoto prime is without a doubt the Canon 400mm f5.6L, which can be found used for under $900.  I own one and it's an incredible bargain---sharpest, clearest, most useful lens I own.
Hope this helps.

Also, see if you can find a local photo store to rent you a copy of the lens for a weekend.  Make sure you like how it works etc. and the pictures are what you're looking for.

And of course, if you can rent a 400 F2.8 for a weekend and shoot a baseball game or other sporting event, go for it.

Quoted: The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 runs about $350 or so and is very sharp and has a great reputation.  The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is also a very sharp lens, though a bit heavier.  I have one and it performs very nicely.  Costs about $400.

I prefer the Tamron because I think it is faster on the autofocus.  You will usually see this Tamron in the "used" cases of Penn Camera stores for about $200 because it is a good general initial lense that people move on from (like when they move to the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS).

By the way, if you get the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS, there will really be no excuses for screwing up a pictue, it is that good.

Quoted: Quoted: The Tamron 28-75 f2.8 runs about $350 or so and is very sharp and has a great reputation.  The Sigma 24-70 f2.8 is also a very sharp lens, though a bit heavier.  I have one and it performs very nicely.  Costs about $400. I prefer the Tamron because I think it is faster on the autofocus.  You will usually see this Tamron in the "used" cases of Penn Camera stores for about $200 because it is a good general initial lense that people move on from (like when they move to the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS). By the way, if you get the Canon 28-135 f/3.5 with IS, there will really be no excuses for screwing up a pictue, it is that good.

Actually, I've found that people who "move up" from the Tamron or Sigma usually buy the Canon 24-70 f2.8L.  I've never read in all the photography forums I frequent of someone moving from the Tamron or Sigma f2.8 to the slower Canon 28-135.

Quoted: You will usually see this Tamron in the "used" cases of Penn Camera stores for about $200 because it is a good general initial lense that people move on from.

For $200 if it's in good condition that'd be a great price....send me a sample.