Zoom lenses

[seashoreCM]

As you manipulate the zoom switch before taking your picture, you should see the picture zoom in the LCD viewfinder and in most cases in the peephole viefinder also. If not, your camera is broken.

Many cameras have a combination of optical and digital zoom. And most cameras with this combination let you make a setting to suppress the digital zoom and the zoom then stops zooming at the optical zoom maximum.

The ability to enlarge the picture after taking it, to review the picture and see more detail in your LCD viewfinder, is a different function. Often it uses the same zoom switch so your suspicions about the zoom switch are real.

Personally I never use digital zoom when taking. Digital zoom can be accomplished just as well after uploading to your computer and does not provide any more picture detail when taking the picture.

 

[Dis-Wiz]

Thanks for your input!

Hopefully I will be able to get my camera to a repair shop pronto!

 

[vickalamode]

So I bought myself a Rebel XSi a couple of months ago but I haven't really had a chance to do much photography (This is pretty much the only set I've put online, if anyone is interested http://www.flickr.com/photos/24843362@N05/sets/72157612546153774/)
Anyways right now all I have is the lens it came with and I want to get a zoom/telephoto lens. Someone recommended a Canon 75-300mm (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/169269-USA/Canon_6472A002AA_75_300mm_f_4_0_5_6_III_USM.html) to me because it is in my price range (I can afford to spend around $200, but not more...I'm only 19 and go to college full time and work to pay for my (nice)car/insurance/food/etc... and this is the 2nd Disney trip I've gone without my parents and paid for myself...so yeah not much money to throw around since I don't get everything in life handed to me like some kids, but I still make sure I get what I want hehe.

So anyways, I want to buy a new lens before I go to Disney in less than 3 weeks! Would anyone else recommend the 75-300 lens? What I want to do with it (in Disney anyways) is be able to take pictures from far away-ish stuff...like maybe get decent shots of the Tree of life from across the bridge wherever, be able to zoom in on the Castle better, stuff like that...nothing crazy like expecting to see the detail in the animals on the tree but just nice, clear shots.

Would this lens work or can anyone recommend any other zoom lenses that work for a Canon that are around my price range (~$200 dollars, this is pretty much the most important part since my trip is in less than 3 weeks and I absolutely CANNOT spend more than that...) I've also looked into renting a lens for the trip but the price those places charge to rent isn't consistent with my budget since the price of renting + shipping + insurance is pretty much what I'd pay for half of a good lens...but after a week its just money thrown out the window and I might or might not get good pictures out of it!


Also, can anyone recommend a good portable tripod? I bought this camera mostly planning to do press photography at concerts and shows (aka a tripod is a BAD idea <----crowdsurfers will kill me in the photo pit, I need to be able to save my camera if one is coming towards me...tripod wouldn't facilitate that lol) Long story short, I haven't gotten one yet but I'm at a point where I should probably get one.


TL;DR: Good zoom lenses for someone on a budget of around $200? Any portable tripod recommendations?

 

[annnewjerz]

I don't shoot Canon, but the basic recommendation that I've gotten regarding telephone lenses is that IS is very important on the long end of the lens if you want to get sharp images and are not going to be using a tripod or monopod while you shoot. The lens you linked to doesn't have IS from what I can tell. You might want to look into Canon 55-250 IS USM lens, which seems to run about $250 on Amazon. It's a little more than you planned to spend, but not too much.

If you do plan on getting the 75-300 f/4 USM lens that you linked to, I would recommend getting some sort of monopod for when you are shooting and don't expect great pictures in low-light situations if you are planning to use this lens hand-held.

A lot of Nikon users have the kit lens (18-55) and the 55-200 to accompany it and seem to be very pleased with the resuts. My longest focal length is 200 right now and I find that there are very few situations where I feel I really need the extra reach.

Good luck!

 

[jann1033]

double post

 

[jann1033]

there is a canon 55-250 Is that is getting good reviews for the price of around 200-300. you might want to check out a gorillapod, around $50for the dslr one( i think last timei looked at it) since it is portable but attaches to fences etc.
lens.... used at B&H but you have to email forcondition...most i have heard feel their ratings on used is accurate http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/shop/10209/Digital_Cameras_Accessories_SLR_Interchangeable_Lenses.html
http://www.google.com/products?q=ef...a=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title
pod
http://www.google.com/products?hl=e...a=X&oi=product_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title

the thing is, for the price you are talking about you aren't going to get much of a zoom with a wide aperture which you need for low light( guessing the concerts etc are indoors). the IS will allow you a few stops lower but you are still talking about 5.6 at the long end of the zoom. so not sure you will be totally happy for one lens for both things

 

[BorisMD]

I used to have the lens you are asking about. It works just fine for outdoor bright light situations.

It won't do well at night, or even twilight without a tripod.

You'll get plenty of zoom for the shots you're talking about as long as there's good light.

I sold mine on ebay a while back and have upgraded. If you aren't expecting pro quality build, it's a fine lens.

The shortcomings are slow speed, non-usm focus, lens rotates with focusing (only significant if using a polarizer), non-L-quality build.

Positives -- good zoom for a good price.

Regards,

Boris

 

[boBQuincy]

From what I have read you might be happier with the 55-250 if the extra $50 or so is in your budget.
Either of these lenses will about max out the GorillaPod SLR-Zoom, it loosens over time and has trouble holding up long lenses.

 

[gdk123]

I just went through the same debate and ended up with the Canon 55-250 IS. I only have used it a little but I am happy with it so far. Check out this site for some examples of pics using this lens. It was $255 shipped from BH and only took 2 days!
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=459569

 

[vickalamode]

Thanks everyone I really appreciate the advice. I ended up getting the 55-250, it's worth the extra $50 to have a better lens. My concern with posting a budget was I just didn't want people telling me "Oh you should just save up for this $800 lens instead its WAY better" well...of course its better...still doesn't mean I can afford it lol.

I ended up getting it on amazon.com as a kit for $269 with a UV filter, hood, a cleaning kit for my camera and a cleaning kit for the lens, since I didn't have any of those accessories, and I know I definitely need at least the cleaning kits!

Thanks for your advice I hope I'm happy with the lens, I'm sure I'll be happy with the pictures for a while until I can afford better lenses

the thing is, for the price you are talking about you aren't going to get much of a zoom with a wide aperture which you need for low light( guessing the concerts etc are indoors). the IS will allow you a few stops lower but you are still talking about 5.6 at the long end of the zoom. so not sure you will be totally happy for one lens for both things

Yeah I know I'm going to need different lenses for concerts....I don't really need to worry about zoom so much at concerts since if I get a photopass I'm in the photo pit (in between the barrier and the stage...closer than the audience can get ) My photographer friend recommended that I should get a fast lens but then again he is the one who recommended that I get the lens you guys all told me NOT to get hahaha.
While I'm taking your suggestions, anyone want to recommend me a lens for concerts? (bad lighting, musicians running around fast...) I took some pictures at a concert last night (Take Action Tour...Cute is What We Aim For was the headliner, I don't know if anyone here knows them...) and I'll post them when they go on my computer but it is taking forever

Anyways thanks for the suggestions everyone! I am sure I'll be happy with the 55-250

 

[Michele]

I would say that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 would give you the speed you need for the concerts however, I think you might be too close to the action to use it. It is a great deal at $84.95 on amazon.

 

[jann1033]

there is a tamron some on here have i think it's28-70ish and around $300-400. i just know the photos from it are pretty good for a lower priced lens. hopefully they will see this and post cause i don't remember who it is canon has one also for about $1000 ( sure it's good for that $$$) and sigma for around the same price as tamron
i looked at the photos in your link and they look good. what did you use for them since the light looks lower*( unless you used a flash)

 

[bob100]

I ended up getting the 55-250, it's worth the extra $50 to have a better lens. My concern with posting a budget was I just didn't want people telling me "Oh you should just save up for this $800 lens instead its WAY better" well...of course its better...still doesn't mean I can afford it lol.

Anyways thanks for the suggestions everyone! I am sure I'll be happy with the 55-250

you will enjoy the 55-250 zoom, good lens for a good price

 

[DizzyV6P]

The Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 is good for concerts. Also carry a 50 f/1.8 in your pocket as well ( It's cheap enough).

 

[vickalamode]

i looked at the photos in your link and they look good. what did you use for them since the light looks lower*( unless you used a flash)

I used the 18-55 lens that came with my camera, the bands let me use flash since it wasn't a concert, just an acoustic show for 30 people...they kind of let us do whatever we wanted lol but I'm glad they did since it helped my pictures come out alright

 

[Groucho]

Hopefully this isn't the only news they'll have today, but it sounds like potentially a solid entry if you're after such a camera. 26mm to 624mm in 35mm equiv is pretty enormous.

The info leaked out a couple ways, the "official" announcement should come later today.

Pentax X70:
* 12.0 megapixels 1/2.33" sensor
* 24x zoom lens 26/2.8 -624/5.0 in 35mm equivalent
* shake reduction
* 11 fps continuous shooting at 2592 x 1944 pixels
* AF is 9-point AF with switchable points, spot, auto, manual or "infinity-landscape"
* metering is multi-segment, center-weighted or spot
* ±2EV (1/3EV steps) exposure compensation
* shutter range: 1/4000 - 1/4s with 4s long exposure
* self-timer, 2s delay timer, interval shooting and auto bracket
* 33.6MB built-in memory and SD card storage
* HD movies with SR (1280 x 720 pixels)
* programme, aperture-priority, shutter-priority and manual modes plus auto
* Face Recognition
* auto sensitivity control, up to ISO 6400
* 2.7" LCD (230,000 dots)
* electronic viewfinder
* image ratio selectable to 4:3, 3:2, 16:9 or 1:1
* auto plus custom white balance
* overexposure compensation
* macro mode down to 1cm
* "Digital Wide" function to composite a 20mm (35mm equivalent) image from two images
* world-time clock
* decorative photo frames
* red-eye reduction

Apologies to whoever is hosting this image of it, I got it from a post by denisv on pentaxforums.

Even has a wheel on the back... looks like they wanted a pretty serious entry. Of course IQ will probably not be the greatest ever with such a lens and 12mp in a 1/2.33" sensor but that's pretty standard in this class lately, no reason why it will be any worse than the rest.

 

[Golf4food]

And meanwhile those of us hoping for a K30 or K20 Super are once again left out in the cold...

This bridge does sound nice though, it just isn't a new dSLR upgrade.

 

[RBennett]

And meanwhile those of us hoping for a K30 or K20 Super are once again left out in the cold...

This bridge does sound nice though, it just isn't a new dSLR upgrade.

Very true. Maybe SOMEDAY I'll get to upgrade to a K20D. However, by that time who KNOWS what will be out. But, at least it IS nice to know that I can find a body for under $700 out there!

 

[Groucho]

And meanwhile those of us hoping for a K30 or K20 Super are once again left out in the cold...

Well, to be fair, they've been much said there will definitely be new ones announced in the May/June timeframe. They had stated after Hoya bought them that they wanted to go to a steady 18-month refresh rate, and have the updates be more than just minor tweaks... the K20D is barely over a year old, so it's not like it's all that old yet.

I don't mind, I'm still happy with mine and no rush to get the urge to go out and upgrade again!

 

[Golf4food]

Well, to be fair, they've been much said there will definitely be new ones announced in the May/June timeframe. They had stated after Hoya bought them that they wanted to go to a steady 18-month refresh rate, and have the updates be more than just minor tweaks... the K20D is barely over a year old, so it's not like it's all that old yet.

I don't mind, I'm still happy with mine and no rush to get the urge to go out and upgrade again!

True, but the K20 is lacking in a few features that are quite common in their Nikon/Canon counterparts for not that much more money (once you remove the name premium charge, haha). I tried to convince myself to get a K20 but until Pentax adds some of those other features that are no commonplace in that level of camera, it will still be a few steps behind and not worth my investment, no matter how much I want to stick with Pentax for the long haul. If the next update doesn't get them more in line with the capabilities of the D90 or 50D, etc. then I think it will be time to jump ship. We can only wait for so long. I don't have a giant collection of old lenses and other bodies to keep me that loyal. It's a great camera and very good at what it does, but for now there are too many things it doesn't do at all that keep me from pulling the trigger, even at the lower price point.