snubbr.com

Which Canon lenses to get?
So now that I've decided to get the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, I am trying to decide on lenses. I'm hearing that the included kit lens isn't really that good (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) so if I opt to buy body only, which lens(es) should I get instead? Or is the kit lens good enough until I decide to get better lenses later?.

(For now, let's stay with inexpensive... I can add more expensive ones in the future.)..

Comments (19)

I've read that the new IS version of that lens (MK II) is actually quite good!..

Comment #1

Do you have a product link available so I can know what to ask for or order? Or is it now included?..

Comment #2

...you might want to wait until the release of the XSi (should be released around april)..

Theres' a chance the XTi prices will drop...or i'm sure you could get a real deal on a used one from someone wanting to upgrade to the XSi..

Comment #3

Joel, if this is your first DSLR (which it sounds like it is) perhaps sticking with the kit lens to start isn't a bad idea - after all, it isn't that much more than the body alone. If you search "Canon 18-55" at pbase.com you will find all kinds of pictures people have taken with that lense...some are very good. It just goes to prove that buying expensive lenses isn't necessary to have great images..

If you don't want to get the kit lense, I would recommend telling us more about what you like to photograph and possibly the conditions you photograph in so that better guidance can be offered regarding your lense choices. There isn't any point in us telling you to get the 50 1.8 if you want to photograph macros of flowers or field sports..

As was mentioned earlier, the XSi is due out very soon. It will be more money (which makes it debatable if it is worth it to you) but the kit lense is said to be quite improved..

Joelwnelson wrote:.

So now that I've decided to get the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, I amtrying to decide on lenses. I'm hearing that the included kit lensisn't really that good (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) so if I opt to buybody only, which lens(es) should I get instead? Or is the kit lensgood enough until I decide to get better lenses later?.

(For now, let's stay with inexpensive... I can add more expensiveones in the future.)..

Comment #4

Go to Amazon.com and search for Canon 18-55IS lens. It is a major improvement over the former kit lens, and it is very inexpensive..

Jerryhttp://jchoate.zenfolio.com/..

Comment #5

I do a wide range of photography... but the most common is landscapes. Plus some night photography... stars, moon, skylines. On occasion I'll do closeup shots of plants, insects, etc..

I've done sporting events, but rarely. At this point I'm not ready to invest in a lens suitable for sporting events..

First priority is something that can get me clear, vivid landscapes. Second priority is closeups..

ShawnCo wrote:.

Joel, if this is your first DSLR (which it sounds like it is) perhapssticking with the kit lens to start isn't a bad idea - after all, itisn't that much more than the body alone. If you search "Canon 18-55"at pbase.com you will find all kinds of pictures people have takenwith that lense...some are very good. It just goes to prove thatbuying expensive lenses isn't necessary to have great images..

If you don't want to get the kit lense, I would recommend telling usmore about what you like to photograph and possibly the conditionsyou photograph in so that better guidance can be offered regardingyour lense choices. There isn't any point in us telling you to getthe 50 1.8 if you want to photograph macros of flowers or fieldsports..

As was mentioned earlier, the XSi is due out very soon. It will bemore money (which makes it debatable if it is worth it to you) butthe kit lense is said to be quite improved..

Joelwnelson wrote:.

So now that I've decided to get the Canon Digital Rebel XTi, I amtrying to decide on lenses. I'm hearing that the included kit lensisn't really that good (EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) so if I opt to buybody only, which lens(es) should I get instead? Or is the kit lensgood enough until I decide to get better lenses later?.

(For now, let's stay with inexpensive... I can add more expensiveones in the future.)..

Comment #6

Joelwnelson wrote:.

Do you have a product link available so I can know what to ask for ororder? Or is it now included?.

B&H Photo has great online prices and Fred Miranda has an interesting used forum which is more reliable than eBay and is frequented by pros and enthusiasts who often upgrade. Most of their gear is in prime shape........check it out to get an idea........http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10Right now there is a mint XTi body for $410 shipped.....Regards,Hank..

Comment #7

On a 1.6X body, 10-22 would be your choice for landscape. If that is to wide, consider the 17-40 (not too fast, but great value.) If you want wide and fast, then 17-55 IS Johnnyhttp://tuxbailey.zenfolio.com..

Comment #8

For now, $300 max for a lens. I can get better lenses later...

Comment #9

I bought an XT about 15 months ago with that same kit lens. I was so excited to finally get a "good" camera after using point and shoot stuff. I opened that box, put on that lens, and it all looked great to me. Started snapping off photos and got buyer's remorse really really fast. These pictures aren't any better than my P&S shots..

A couple of problems..

The biggest: Me. I didn't know how to actually take a decent picture..

The second biggest: The lens. You really have to know the strengths (few) of this lens. If you're always outside, it's not bad. But it is slow (f/3.5-5.6) which means especially at 55mm, you get lousy shutter speeds for any type of indoor shooting without flash..

One week later. I bought the 50mm 1.8. Wow what a difference in lenses. This is a great lens and it costs $85. You don't get any zoom, but when you learn this lens, it is really really nice to shoot with..

Two weeks later. I bought the 70-200 f/4L for more telephoto, and better quality. OK, now this is what I was expecting a DSLR to shoot like. But it does cost about $550. Fast focusing, not great speed (but even at f/4 this thing works much better than the kit lens at f/3.5, and you get constant f/4 from 70-200)..

14 months later. I have finally learned how to use the XT and am very happy with the way my photography skills are improving. The body finally started feeling a bit limiting. Bought a 5D. Wow..

Now I've added these lenses:.

24-105 f/4L IS Excellent general purpose lens, but it costs about $1000 (only $650 in the 5D kit).

85mm f/1.8. Loved my 50mm so much, I got this one for the 5D. Superb portrait lens. Cost about $340..

The 17-40L would cost around $600, more than you want to spend. Same with the.

If you are on a budget, you can't go wrong with the 50mm f/1.8..

I hear the IS version of the kit lens (~$200) is supposed to be better, but who knows..

If you can just jump in and go for the good stuff, do it. It really does make your photographic experience that much better..

I don't know anything about photography. I just like to press the shutter button and hear that sound...

Comment #10

#1.Is this the correct IS version to get?.

Http://www.amazon.com/...TF8&coliid=IPUVHMZY89YUP&colid=20QA4HXPATT1S.

#2..

What about this for an add-on lens? Good pick or could I do better for a similar price?If this is a good one, do I even need to get #1 or should I do this instead?.

Http://www.amazon.com/...UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1204821648&sr=8-1.

#3.I plan to also get this one:.

Http://www.amazon.com/...TF8&coliid=IJSFHPDSZ4P1T&colid=20QA4HXPATT1S..

Comment #11

Check out B&H before you buy any lens. That 17-55 that Amazon has for $199, B&H has for $174. Always check with B&H and Adorama.http://jaburke.zenfolio.com/..

Comment #12

I would get the 18-55 IS rather than the 28-105 for no real reason other than the fact that you need a wide lens for landscapes. The 28-105 is not wide enough on a 1.6 crop camera. Rather than rush into the lens game that we all play, I recommend that you buy only the 18-55 IS and, perhaps, the 50 f/1.8 for now. Shoot a couple thousand pics and then decide if you need additional lenses. By that time, you will have a better idea what you really need and want. Besides, in the meantime you will be buying a camera case, tripod (they are relatively expensive), and other photo gadgets..

Jerryhttp://jchoate.zenfolio.com/..

Comment #13

I agree with the guy before me. Get the 18-55 IS. However, I wouldn't bother with the 50 f1.8. You're already covered there except the speed. I'd opt for a nice macro in the 100mm range. Tamron's 90mm macro is considered excellent.

Just a thought..

The macro lens will cost you more. They run around $400 for Canon, Tamron, Sigma or Tokina. Personally, I understand that the Tamron is the best. It'll be a lens that covers macro, portrait, medium telephoto and you'll keep it for years, long after you upgrade the body. Macros just about all have pro-level optics. Trust me, once you take a picture of a flower with a macro lens, you'll be hooked..

I'm not the best macro shooter, but it's a lot of fun. Most anything can be interesting..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #14

Guidenet wrote:.

I agree with the guy before me. Get the 18-55 IS. However, I wouldn'tbother with the 50 f1.8. You're already covered there except thespeed..

You contradict yourself. He is covered in the focal range, but not covered in the speed. The 50mm 1.8 is a totally different beast that the 18-55 IS. Try doing portraits with the zoom. If you like the soft dreamy background blur (bokeh) utilized in portraiture, you want wide apertures. You're only going to be at f/5.6 with the 18-55 at 50mm.



Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

You'll never get that kind of blur with the 18-55..

I'd opt for a nice macro in the 100mm range. Tamron's 90mmmacro is considered excellent. You can use it as a medium telephotoand it'll open the world of macro photography to you. Just a thought..

This is a good idea, if he can afford it..

There really is not any good reason I can think of why any Canon owner starting off inexpensively should not have the 50mm 1.8..

The 28-105 you listed I understand is a decent general purpose lens. As one person pointed out, 28mm is not very wide on an XTi because of the crop factor. But a zoom to 105 is going to be quite useful regardless..

Read the reviews athttp://www.the-digital-picture.com.

I don't know anything about photography. I just like to press the shutter button and hear that sound...

Comment #15

Strat60 wrote:.

I bought an XT about 15 months ago with that same kit lens. I was soexcited to finally get a "good" camera after using point and shootstuff. I opened that box, put on that lens, and it all looked greatto me. Started snapping off photos and got buyer's remorse reallyreally fast. These pictures aren't any better than my P&S shots..

A couple of problems..

The biggest: Me. I didn't know how to actually take a decent picture.The second biggest: The lens. You really have to know the strengths(few) of this lens. If you're always outside, it's not bad. But it isslow (f/3.5-5.6) which means especially at 55mm, you get lousyshutter speeds for any type of indoor shooting without flash..

One week later. I bought the 50mm 1.8. Wow what a difference inlenses. This is a great lens and it costs $85. You don't get anyzoom, but when you learn this lens, it is really really nice to shootwith..

Two weeks later. I bought the 70-200 f/4L for more telephoto, andbetter quality. OK, now this is what I was expecting a DSLR to shootlike. But it does cost about $550. Fast focusing, not great speed(but even at f/4 this thing works much better than the kit lens atf/3.5, and you get constant f/4 from 70-200)..

14 months later. I have finally learned how to use the XT and am veryhappy with the way my photography skills are improving. The bodyfinally started feeling a bit limiting. Bought a 5D. Wow..

Now I've added these lenses:24-105 f/4L IS Excellent general purpose lens, but it costs about$1000 (only $650 in the 5D kit)85mm f/1.8. Loved my 50mm so much, I got this one for the 5D. Superbportrait lens. Cost about $340..

The 17-40L would cost around $600, more than you want to spend. Samewith the.

If you are on a budget, you can't go wrong with the 50mm f/1.8..

I would recommend 35 f2 instead of the 50 1.8, a bit wider and f2 is fast although more expensive also. And later the 17-40..

Rafy Sugirihttp://www.flickr.com/photos/rafysugiri/sets/http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/dna.php?username=79015415@N00.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #16

Strat60 wrote:.

Guidenet wrote:.

I agree with the guy before me. Get the 18-55 IS. However, I wouldn'tbother with the 50 f1.8. You're already covered there except thespeed..

You contradict yourself. He is covered in the focal range, but notcovered in the speed..

If you read carefully, that's what I said. "You're already covered there EXCEPT the speed.".

Moreover, the 90-100 macro will do nicely with regards to bokeh..

In the past, many Canon owners bought midrange primes as thier sencond lense purchase mostly because their kit lenses were of very low quality. With the new 18-55 IS that no longer is true. Nikon owners, and other brands, also sometimes purchased 50 primes but not to the same extent nor so often as their next purchase after the body kit. If they wanted a good portrait lens, they'd get an 80 to 105 range fast prime. They cost more, but it wasn't already covered in focal length by their kit and their kit was pretty sharp..

Rather than blow another $100 on a 50 f1.8, I think the OP would be better served with a 90 macro for use as a macro, portrait and mid tele..

For some reason, I notice that people here often respond without carefully reading what they're responding to..

Have fun...

Comment #17

Guidenet wrote:.

Strat60 wrote:.

Guidenet wrote:.

I agree with the guy before me. Get the 18-55 IS. However, I wouldn'tbother with the 50 f1.8. You're already covered there except thespeed..

You contradict yourself. He is covered in the focal range, but notcovered in the speed..

If you read carefully, that's what I said. "You're already coveredthere EXCEPT the speed.".

I see your point. I was responding more to the "I wouldn't bother with the 50 1.8." It appeared that you were suggesting it wasn't necessary at all because he was already covered. I pointed out it is a very different type of lens even if it has an overlap in focal length. But I see what you're saying now..

Moreover, the 90-100 macro will do nicely with regards to bokeh..

You're probably right. I was responding to this line from the OP:.

"(For now, let's stay with inexpensive... I can add more expensive ones in the future.)".

I guess the term "inexpensive" is relative, but when you talk "inexpensive" the 50mm should be one of the first things that comes to mind..

No doubt the 100mm Macro will give some nice results, but it is $470. That's as much as the XTi body right now..

For some reason, I notice that people here often respond withoutcarefully reading what they're responding to..

That's my point about your suggestion of the 100mm macro when the OP asked for "inexpensive" lens suggestions. I assumed that if he was buying a $500 body and a $200 zoom, the 100mm would be out of his range..

But if $470 on a lens is inexpensive to the OP, then I agree with you on this lens suggestion. If that is too expensive, then don't disregard the 50mm. It gives an entirely different photographic experience than the 18-55. And it's dang cheap..

I don't know anything about photography. I just like to press the shutter button and hear that sound...

Comment #18

No problem. I see your point too. The 50 f1.8 is something that could be a great addition to anyone's gadget bag. You're right..

I just have never cared for it much. I've always loved Nikkor normal macros. I use the 60mm f2.8 as my normal lens. One problem is that when using it for portrait, and I do, it sometimes is too sharp. LOL You have to soften it a bit or women might smack you..

I've got Nikkor macros going back to the late 1960s in that focal range. I love them, probably too much. I use an old 55 f3.5 Micro on an extension tube to this day. It takes absolutely beautiful images... all manual of course..

I'm going to try a longer Macro lens soon. I'm seriously thinking about either the 105 f2.8 VR Nikkor or the Sigma 150 f2.8. The Nikkor is slightly better optically, but the Sigma is excellent and a little longer and cheaper at $599. Decisions decisions. I've got GAS since 1958. Gear Acquisition Syndrome...

Comment #19

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.