Recommend me a lense for my DSLR?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Recommend me a lense for my DSLR?

Posted: 5/28/2009 11:39:46 AM EDT

I have a Canon EOS Rebel T1i coming this week and it has an 18mm-55mm lens included.

What other range of lenses should I consider - I do enjoy shooting close-ups/macro too.

Posted: 5/28/2009 12:29:47 PM EDT

[#1]

It's easy to say

16-35 f/2.8 or 17-40 f/4
24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8 IS
MP-E 65 f/2.8
180 f/3.5

and have you looking at $6000 in lenses when what you may really want/need for your purposes is the 10-22 f/3.5 or the 24-105 f/4.

I suggest using the 18-55 for a while and see where it comes up lacking for you.

Not wide enough?
Not telephoto enough?
Doesn't focus close enough? (for macro work)
Too slow? (too small of a maximum aperature)
Not sharp enough?

Posted: 5/28/2009 1:07:11 PM EDT

[#2]

the cannon 10-22 is fun, i found it good for travel pics, a bit expensive though....

Posted: 5/28/2009 1:41:10 PM EDT

[#3]

$6k is definitely out of my range - i'm just a weekend noobie :D

Quoted:

It's easy to say

16-35 f/2.8 or 17-40 f/4

24-70 f/2.8

70-200 f/2.8 IS

MP-E 65 f/2.8

180 f/3.5

and have you looking at $6000 in lenses when what you may really want/need for your purposes is the 10-22 f/3.5 or the 24-105 f/4.

I suggest using the 18-55 for a while and see where it comes up lacking for you.

Not wide enough?

Not telephoto enough?

Doesn't focus close enough? (for macro work)

Too slow? (too small of a maximum aperature)

Not sharp enough?

Posted: 5/28/2009 3:31:54 PM EDT

[#4]

i just bought the same camera after having a fair share of previous dslr's. i plan on picking up a 70-200 f4 L. it doesnt have the IS feature but im only using it outdoors so it shouldnt be a huge issue at the speeds im using it at. it is also the least expensive L telephoto at 600 bucks.

Posted: 5/28/2009 3:33:24 PM EDT

[#5]

also the 18-55 IS that it comes with isnt bad. its big improvement from their previous kit lenses. i would recommend a good wide angle in the 1.4-2.8 fstop range for low light.

Posted: 5/28/2009 3:47:49 PM EDT

[#6]

Canon 70-200

Canon 10-22

Canon 24-70L
(no picture yet)

Posted: 5/28/2009 4:14:43 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

Canon 70-200

http://www.dontblamemeivoted4johnmccain.com/ArfCom/images/70200F2_01.jpg

Canon 10-22

http://www.dontblamemeivoted4johnmccain.com/ArfCom/images/Can1022_01.jpg

Canon 24-70L

(no picture yet)

isn't those over $6k

Posted: 5/28/2009 4:45:44 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
isn't those over $6k

16-35 f/2.8 $1400 or 17-40 f/4 $699
24-70 f/2.8 $1190
70-200 f/2.8 IS $1599
MP-E 65 f/2.8 $890
180 f/3.5 $1350
10-22 f/3.5-4.5 $699

See how jumping can be costly?

Posted: 5/29/2009 9:24:05 AM EDT

[#9]

Get a Pentax then you can buy used lenses for pennies on the dollar.

Posted: 6/4/2009 2:36:59 PM EDT

[#10]

Depends on your price range and what you want to do. Generally speaking, perhaps the 55-250mm IS would give you a decent, inexpensive telephoto lens with IS (~$225 refurb or ~$255 new). Then for low-light, get another decent, inexpensive prime lens: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Standard AutoFocus Lens (less than $120 @ Adorama)

Posted: 6/11/2009 7:47:26 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Depends on your price range and what you want to do. Generally speaking, perhaps the 55-250mm IS would give you a decent, inexpensive telephoto lens with IS (~$225 refurb or ~$255 new). Then for low-light, get another decent, inexpensive prime lens: Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Standard AutoFocus Lens (less than $120 @ Adorama)

thanks for the recommendation, amazon has the 50mm f1/8 II for $91 with free shipping! i just placed an order! :D

Posted: 6/14/2009 7:44:42 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
It's easy to say

16-35 f/2.8 or 17-40 f/4
24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8 IS
MP-E 65 f/2.8
180 f/3.5

and have you looking at $6000 in lenses when what you may really want/need for your purposes is the 10-22 f/3.5 or the 24-105 f/4.

I suggest using the 18-55 for a while and see where it comes up lacking for you.

Not wide enough?
Not telephoto enough?
Doesn't focus close enough? (for macro work)
Too slow? (too small of a maximum aperature)
Not sharp enough?

This in red, don't rush it and you'll save money in the long run.

Posted: 6/15/2009 4:31:13 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:

It's easy to say

16-35 f/2.8 or 17-40 f/4

24-70 f/2.8

70-200 f/2.8 IS

MP-E 65 f/2.8

180 f/3.5

and have you looking at $6000 in lenses when what you may really want/need for your purposes is the 10-22 f/3.5 or the 24-105 f/4.

I suggest using the 18-55 for a while and see where it comes up lacking for you.

Not wide enough?

Not telephoto enough?

Doesn't focus close enough? (for macro work)

Too slow? (too small of a maximum aperature)

Not sharp enough?

This in red, don't rush it and you'll save money in the long run.

i just got my 50mm F1/8 this morning and damn, the pics are incredible and the difference it makes.

unfortunately i need to exchange it back to amazon.com because there is an 1mm piece of plastic like stick between the lens - sucks! at least they pay for return shipping too.

Posted: 6/16/2009 5:22:45 AM EDT

[#14]

Nifty 50 is a fun lens. My XTi has "hunting" problems with that lens in AIS? focus mode. Cannot remember what it is called right now. But I have to shoot one shot focus using it. Zooms- I started out with a 70-200 f4L and was not happy so I jumped up to the 70-200 f2.8L IS. Now THAT IS A LENS! Oh, one big difference is your selection of filters. Honestly, go with B&W filters. They are made from optical grade glass just like your lenses are. Cheaper filters are made with regular sheet glass. I noticed a jump in quality when I ditched the Tiffens.
I also have found a lot of fun shooting with the 10-22 EF-S lens I just picked up last month. Great lens for a carshow! But be careful, you will wind up shooting everything with it and get a lot of photos of an interesting perspective, and no shots of standard views!

My gear:
XTi with battery grip
18-55 EF-S IS
10-22 EF-S
70-200 EF f2.8 L
50 EF f1.8
580EX II

I find I can do a lot with what I have. Problem is that everything in my bag is HEAVY! The more you buy, the more you want to take everywhere with you.

Posted: 6/16/2009 6:12:29 AM EDT

[#15]

sweet stuff you have there, it's like BRD!

tell me more about the 10-22 lens you have? is it considered a macro?

Posted: 6/17/2009 8:47:32 AM EDT

[#16]

10-22 Macro? No way! I took this shot using it at 10mm. No shit, I was probably 8" to 12" from the headlight when I snapped it.
You can see the reflection of my big old arse in the bumper. Image appears softer than it is, I think photobucket ruins a good image.

Posted: 6/17/2009 8:54:45 AM EDT

[#17]

sweet stuff you have there, it's like BRD!

I had to google the BRD acronym! LOL!! Now that's funny, because the camera gear is worse! I can whip out my Canon and shoot it anywhere and nobody calls the po-po on me! I do like shootin, both bullets and photos. One I can do anywhere, the other at select locations.
I bet if I whipped out my AR at the carshow, I would have gotten a beat down or lead in the ass, in a real quick way!!

Posted: 6/17/2009 9:43:58 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

sweet stuff you have there, it's like BRD!

I had to google the BRD acronym! LOL!! Now that's funny, because the camera gear is worse! I can whip out my Canon and shoot it anywhere and nobody calls the po-po on me! I do like shootin, both bullets and photos. One I can do anywhere, the other at select locations.

I bet if I whipped out my AR at the carshow, I would have gotten a beat down or lead in the ass, in a real quick way!!

what's the benefits of a 10-22mm lens?

and what kind of specs for a macro lens should i get, those are expensive!?

Posted: 6/17/2009 9:53:07 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:

sweet stuff you have there, it's like BRD!

I had to google the BRD acronym! LOL!! Now that's funny, because the camera gear is worse! I can whip out my Canon and shoot it anywhere and nobody calls the po-po on me! I do like shootin, both bullets and photos. One I can do anywhere, the other at select locations.
I bet if I whipped out my AR at the carshow, I would have gotten a beat down or lead in the ass, in a real quick way!!

One of reasons I love photography soooo much. It's almost as bad as shootin' shit.

-Mark.

Posted: 6/17/2009 9:56:12 AM EDT

[#20]

I have a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon that does a great job (they make a Canon mount as well)

Posted: 6/17/2009 2:16:48 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

I have a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon that does a great job (they make a Canon mount as well)

can someone tell me the benefits of getting a 10-20mm?

Posted: 6/17/2009 5:19:50 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I have a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon that does a great job (they make a Canon mount as well)

can someone tell me the benefits of getting a 10-20mm?

wide angle.

stuff like the above:

Quoted:
10-22 Macro? No way! I took this shot using it at 10mm. No shit, I was probably 8" to 12" from the headlight when I snapped it.
You can see the reflection of my big old arse in the bumper. Image appears softer than it is, I think photobucket ruins a good image.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y157/ScottsGT/IMG_5942A.jpg

Posted: 6/18/2009 9:49:09 AM EDT

[#23]

what's the benefits of a 10-22mm lens?

and what kind of specs for a macro lens should i get, those are expensive!?

So you can get crazy ass perspective photos like the one I posted! Google 10-22 images and look at the phots that come up. Lots of Depth Of Field too. It's more of a "fun" lens that doubles as a good architecture lens for indoor/outdoor shots. Objects up close get elongated and stretched out of proportion.

Macro is almost microscopic in nature, but not as much. Shallow DOF, but you can fill your whole frame with a ladybug or the muzzle of your favorite weapon. Canon has a great 100mm macro. It's on my "I want" list.

100mm 2.8 macro

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Recommend me a lense for my DSLR?

General » Photography & Photoshopping

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us