Am I over-thinking the lens thing?

[AndrewWG]

All,

I am still looking to buy a DSLR in the near future. You have all heard this story from me for a month now (sorry for that). I am pretty much settled on the Canon XTi or possibly the Canon 30D. I am looking at my lens choices and see things like f2.8, f4, and f3.5-5.6. Obviously I know that a f2.8 throughout a long range is great and the price tells me so. f4 is also real good although more reasonable on price. However, whenever I see f3.5-5.6 I immediately think "junk". Is this true or am I thinking too much about the aperture here? I see some relatively expensive lenses (over $300) that are in this aperture range and I have to ask why? They must be somewhat good lenses.

Unfortunately I don't have a bottomless wallet so I am starting to consider other lens options. I wanted all f2.8L (of course everyone does) but that is not at all realistic in my current situation.

Any thoughts?

Andy

 

[Master Mason]

you have to find the lenses that fit your needs, not everything has to be canon either... the sigma's are about a 3rd of the cost, and can be very good there are other brands as well.

 

[Lizziejane]

I have the XTi and have spent many hours oogling over the faster, more expensive lenses. As you mention, a faster lens is desireable (apart from the price!), however, I quickly got over my "f-stop lens envy" after purchasing the Canon 50 mm 1.8. Don't get me wrong, it's a great lens, the price can't be beat, nice and sharp - when you can get the focus right. The thing about those F1.8 and F2.4's is that the dof is very, very narrow when wide open. So, personally, I find it much harder to get a decent shot out of the thing. It's not so bad if there's lots of distance between me and the subject, and I'm not shooting wide open, but things that are closer are a real challenge.

Personally, I'm taking time to really get some practice in before working my way up to any kind of L series lens. It would just be a waste of money right now, until I understand what I'm doing a little better.

 

[MICKEY88]

All,

I am still looking to buy a DSLR in the near future. You have all heard this story from me for a month now (sorry for that). I am pretty much settled on the Canon XTi or possibly the Canon 30D. I am looking at my lens choices and see things like f2.8, f4, and f3.5-5.6. Obviously I know that a f2.8 throughout a long range is great and the price tells me so. f4 is also real good although more reasonable on price. However, whenever I see f3.5-5.6 I immediately think "junk". Is this true or am I thinking too much about the aperture here? I see some relatively expensive lenses (over $300) that are in this aperture range and I have to ask why? They must be somewhat good lenses.

Unfortunately I don't have a bottomless wallet so I am starting to consider other lens options. I wanted all f2.8L (of course everyone does) but that is not at all realistic in my current situation.

Any thoughts?

Andy

fast lenses are nice if you need them and want to deal with the extra weight, ebay is full of fast lenses that were barely used, because owners decided the weight was just not worth it...

I personally have been shooting for over 30 years and until last year I've never owned a fast lens with the exception of my 1.7 50mm lens that came with my first minolta slr in 1976...

for the type of shooting I did in the past I didn't feel the need for a 2.8 lens I adapted to shooting conditions and was fine...

I also never had a lens wider than 35mm, and never felt the need for a wider lens... some people will insist you need a wide lens also....it all depends on your shooting and learning to compensate...

for 20 years I had 2 lenses a 35-105 and a 100-300, this setup worked perfectly for me, especially after I picked up the second body and eliminated the need to change lenses

last year I bought a 28-75 2.8 Minolta lens and earlier this month I bought a Tokina AT-X pro f/2.8 80-200mm lens ..

I also still carry my 100-300 just in case I want a longer zoom and I also have a 28-300 sigma lens just in case I'm feeling lazy and don't want to bother with more than one lens...

 

[jann1033]

husband and i were just discussing this tonight.
for me the L f4 is the "best" i can expect to get right now, money wise. an f2.8 would be very nice but just way to much as are the L IS lenses. sigma scares me due to my past experience but i do see nice shots here with them so i think them or tokina might be the next thing i get if i go with a 2.8 (ever.) mickey 88 got a tokina 80-200 ( think it's 2.8) and it looks good from what i see. usually the f4 is fine for me but like tonight at sundown with a mommy deer and her 2 fawns, i could've used the 2.8 since my 50 f1.8 was to short focal length. but maybe if i was getting money for those shots i could see buying those $$ lenses but since that is not the case, it's $600 and under for me
just a thought about the "junK', really probably what, 75% of the time you can use f8 or above?( at least me, if you did weddings or something probably not) so even a decent 5.6 should be plenty sharp there. or raise the iso some. unless you do a lot of low light stuff how much would you use something lower than that. and you can't have everything, so imo you spend more money on what you use the most

 

[mabas9395]

It is too easy to buy something that you think you need just because its the "best".

I think this is why the kit lens is a good starting point for most people. Give it a good workout and it lets you know if you need something faster or longer or wider. The downside is that if you're like me, after using the kit lens for a while, you decide that you need something faster AND longer AND wider.

 

[MICKEY88]

husband and i were just discussing this tonight.
for me the L f4 is the "best" i can expect to get right now, money wise. an f2.8 would be very nice but just way to much as are the L IS lenses. sigma scares me due to my past experience but i do see nice shots here with them so i think them or tokina might be the next thing i get if i go with a 2.8 (ever.) mickey 88 got a tokina 80-200 ( think it's 2.8) and it looks good from what i see. usually the f4 is fine for me but like tonight at sundown with a mommy deer and her 2 fawns, i could've used the 2.8 since my 50 f1.8 was to short focal length. but maybe if i was getting money for those shots i could see buying those $$ lenses but since that is not the case, it's $600 and under for me
just a thought about the "junK', really probably what, 75% of the time you can use f8 or above?( at least me, if you did weddings or something probably not) so even a decent 5.6 should be plenty sharp there. or raise the iso some. unless you do a lot of low light stuff how much would you use something lower than that. and you can't have everything, so imo you spend more money on what you use the most

if you decide on the tokina 80-200 make sure you get the ATX pro, they have a non pro version with a red ring around the front rather than the gold, the reviews on that aren't as good as the pro lens..

 

[AndrewWG]

Thanks for all your input on this. I am most likely over-thinking this issue at this point. I haven't even purchased a camera yet. However, I have purchased many many things in this lifetime that have been on the lower end of quality and, as a result, have had less than quality results from them. With this purchase, I am trying to get it right the first time and not just jump into something that I will be displeased with.

I will most likely take the advice of mabas9395 and use a kit lens for a bit to see what my results will be like. However, I already know that I will need at least a 300mm lens and am already looking to the 100-400mm lens. If it is like carrying a boat around my neck, then so be it. I need that length for alot of what I do. I need the assurance that if I need it, it is there for me to use. Limitations on focal length really kill me. That is why I purchased the S2 IS when I did. I needed the 12X optical as opposed to the 3X optical that me A85 had. My concern with this is that I will get a lens that is junk at the longer focal lengths. I don't feel that I need "wider" lenses at any point. This may change, but overall, I don't like a wide point of view. I don't do much in the way of landscape photos (if at all).

At this point, my thoughts are to stick with the f4 lenses (as Jan mentioned) or maybe a Sigma f2.8 if I feel I need it. The way I see it is that I can always sell the f4 lenses if they turn out to be not enough, but I suspect that they should be fine for most of my uses. I will also purchase the "nifty fifty" because for $80, why not?

The Tokina 80-200 pro looks nice but I'm thinking that the 200 will just make me think that I should have bought a 300. That will be a decision I will have to make after using the camera for awhile.

Well, I guess my confusion will continue throughout my hobby, but for now I think I will get the camera (XTi or 30D) within the next month or so and give it a real workout to decide what I REALLY need. Of course tonight Kyle will probably convince me that I need a Nikon so I will be back to the old drawing board!

Andy

 

[MICKEY88]

Thanks for all your input on this. I am most likely over-thinking this issue at this point. I haven't even purchased a camera yet. However, I have purchased many many things in this lifetime that have been on the lower end of quality and, as a result, have had less than quality results from them. With this purchase, I am trying to get it right the first time and not just jump into something that I will be displeased with.

I will most likely take the advice of mabas9395 and use a kit lens for a bit to see what my results will be like. However, I already know that I will need at least a 300mm lens and am already looking to the 100-400mm lens. If it is like carrying a boat around my neck, then so be it. I need that length for alot of what I do. I need the assurance that if I need it, it is there for me to use. Limitations on focal length really kill me. That is why I purchased the S2 IS when I did. I needed the 12X optical as opposed to the 3X optical that me A85 had. My concern with this is that I will get a lens that is junk at the longer focal lengths. I don't feel that I need "wider" lenses at any point. This may change, but overall, I don't like a wide point of view. I don't do much in the way of landscape photos (if at all).

At this point, my thoughts are to stick with the f4 lenses (as Jan mentioned) or maybe a Sigma f2.8 if I feel I need it. The way I see it is that I can always sell the f4 lenses if they turn out to be not enough, but I suspect that they should be fine for most of my uses. I will also purchase the "nifty fifty" because for $80, why not?

The Tokina 80-200 pro looks nice but I'm thinking that the 200 will just make me think that I should have bought a 300. That will be a decision I will have to make after using the camera for awhile.

Well, I guess my confusion will continue throughout my hobby, but for now I think I will get the camera (XTi or 30D) within the next month or so and give it a real workout to decide what I REALLY need. Of course tonight Kyle will probably convince me that I need a Nikon so I will be back to the old drawing board!

Andy

what the heck go with Sony....LOL in camera image stabilization...


seriously though, the beauty of digital is the ability to crop with pc, so using a 200mm lens if you get a good sharp picture you can crop and enlarge...

remember the crop factor with the dslr

regardless of which you get if you get a beast lens with a tripod ring on it,, I highly recomend the lens cradle, it makes carrying so much easier..

 

[AndrewWG]

what the heck go with Sony....LOL in camera image stabilization...


seriously though, the beauty of digital is the ability to crop with pc, so using a 200mm lens if you get a good sharp picture you can crop and enlarge...

remember the crop factor with the dslr

regardless of which you get if you get a beast lens with a tripod ring on it,, I highly recomend the lens cradle, it makes carrying so much easier..

I did look at the lens cradle. You may have been the one that posted the link to it. It looks like a good deal. I especially like the fact that it reduces the stress on the camera to lens connection and keeps the camera from pointing downward at all times.

Andy

 

[MICKEY88]

I did look at the lens cradle. You may have been the one that posted the link to it. It looks like a good deal. I especially like the fact that it reduces the stress on the camera to lens connection and keeps the camera from pointing downward at all times.

Andy

I have posted the link several times, I tested mine out for the first time last saturday at the celtic fling, not only is it great when the lens is mounted to the camera, but it makes changing lenses easier. I popped the 80-200 off of the camera popped my 28-70 on, put the rear cap on the 80-200 and left it hang around my neck ready for another quick lens change..

 

[Groucho]

Remember too that most of us are talking about photography at a Disney park, where you're taking a lot more low-light photos than you might in everyday shooting, so every little bit of extra light we can get is treasured!

The speed of a lens doesn't have anything to do with its quality, but generally, quality and speed both cost money, so you'll find that expensive lenses are one or the other or both. You can certainly find fast lenses that aren't terribly good...

And when you see a cheap junk lens, chances are that it will be slow, so you're really stuck having to do research on the specific lenses you're interested in.

The other thing is that zoom lenses inherently have more compromises, so it's harder to get really great quality and speed out of them, that's why those lenses cost so darn much. F2.8 is fast for a zoom but only average for a prime.

I have a lightly used Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 on its way to me now, so for the moment, I guess I'll be going with a fast zoom for medium-to-sorta-wide shots, but it was tough deciding between that and the Sigma 30mm F1.4. I'm sure I'll still be using my 50mm F1.4 a lot, too.

 

[handicap18]

I think I convinced him to go with the Nikon D50. I though he was going to run away with it last night (just kidding Andy).

In the almost 20 years I've been using slr's I've only recently been using "fast lenses" in the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 and Tamron 90mm f/2.8. Yet I still mostly use a regular f/3.5-5.6 zoom. That particular lens is VERY sharp.

Later tonight I'll post some pictures in the Baseball thread of the pics we took last night at Cape Cod League game.

I think I did mention the Sigma 50-500mm lens. Its only $999.

All right, I'm heading out to Bourne to catch another baseball game. Hopefully it wont rain.

 

[AndrewWG]

I think I convinced him to go with the Nikon D50. I though he was going to run away with it last night (just kidding Andy).

Oh well, I tried to pull the old switheroo when Kyle wasn't looking but I guess he noticed that his camera was sticking out of my tiny camera bag and pulled the double switcheroo on me! When I got home, my camera was in there and his was gone. DOH! Oh well, maybe next time...

Andy

 

[JR6ooo4]

If you can use canon's kit lens then a f3.5-5 aperture lens will seem twice as good. Since most say the kit lens is best between f8-11.

Mikeeee

 

[webshark3]

If you don't know what you need, start with the kit lens, and the 50mm f1.8 prime.

Once you start playing around and learning, you quickly discover what lenses you really need.

 

[mabas9395]

Probably the last thing you should do is ask a forum like this for lens advice. We'll all tell you to go and get that dream lens that we can't afford ourselves!

 

[AndrewWG]

Probably the last thing you should do is ask a forum like this for lens advice. We'll all tell you to go and get that dream lens that we can't afford ourselves!

I know all too well that trick that is played here! Nah, most people are quite honest with their advice and we all know that a $2000 lens will be better than a $200 lens. Unfortunately for all, I will not be testing the $2000 lenses for everyone just yet. Wish I was in a position to do that though!

Andy

 

[DVC Jen]

When my husband bought me the Canon 30D it came with the 28-135 IS lens. It is MUCH better (sorry jan ) than most kit lenses. As a matter of fact - I had already purchased the lens for my XTi. So I sold the one that came with the 30D kit on Ebay.

Just something to think about if you are looking for more of a range in a kit lens.

 

[AndrewWG]

Has anyone tried the Tamron 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 AF Di-II LD IF Macro? It seems like a great walkaround lens for under $500 but since it is under $500, is it any good?

Andy