You have to login first in order to be able to post messages.
Click here to login or register if you are a new user.

Lens for Canon camera

Showing posts 1 - 20 of 34
Page:
1
 2 >
 of 2
Inspireme
Im lucky enough to own a canon eos 300d, I noticed that we have a lot of other lucky photographers with the same camera here on dreamstime... So I thought, what better place to ask some advice on a new lens :)



firstly, The canon image stabilisation lenses, are they worth the extra?



Next question : The new canons IS "L" range on lens is super expensive, whats the deal with these? are they worth it?



Any other lens that you have and like? I really want to do some nature photography so Im looking for 400mm-500mm lens *gulp*



What about teleconverters? worth it?



hehe so many questions, would appreciate any general advice as I dont know much about the kit at the moment.



Thanks!

other junk!...
Edited: 08/13/2004, 12:28:41 PM
Lucato
Hi Inspirime, I'm another lucky guy as you are. :)



I'm here to hear too. I liked your questions. I'm intending to buy a smaller lenses, maybe a 70-300mm. :) I'm very begginer with cams and lenses. Ive heard that Canon EF lenses (focal length conversion factor is approx 1.6X compared to full-frame 35mm film format), so If I buy a 300mm will I get like a 480mm as an analogic 35mm cam? Wow, w/ your 500mm you'll get 800mm. :)



I'm wondering also what brands lenses can we use with our Digital Rebel (EOS 300D). I've heard Sigma lenses can be used too and they are chipper than Canon.



Ok, too much questions. Let's hear from others.



Cheers!



Canon EOS Digital (Few models) Canon Lenses (Few model...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 12:55:58 PM
Ericsphotos
Hi guys,

I am a lucky owner of Canon 10D (an older brother of 300). Here in the US your camera is called Canon Digital Rebel as you probably know, but it doesn't matter. I used to have Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 IS lens. While the image stabilization was a great thing I was not happy with the overall quality. I sold it on Ebay and bought Canon 70-200 f4.0 L glass. This is an excellent lens and not very expensive. I strongly recommend this one if you want to try Canon "L" lenses. With you camera you can use Sigma lenses also but be careful with older ones. I have Sigma 18-35 mm which was not compatible with EOS 10D. I had to send it to Sigma factory and they exchange a chip inside the lens to make it compatible. In spite of the fact that the lens was out of warranty and I didn't have any receipts, they did it for free! Great service. Also remember that the IS lens that I mentioned (75-300) you can't use with IS turned on while panning. The new IS lenses are improved in this matter but the old ones were not that sophisticated.
Images processed in Photoshop CS. Previously I used Canon EOS 650, Ca...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 14:51:13 PM
Pbphoto
I'm shooting with the Digital Rebel (300D) and love it. I bought the camera with the Canon 18-55mm lens as a kit. This lens has proved to be a very good lens and is also a macro lens, comparable to my 50mm macro lens. This lens only works on the Rebel.



I was shooting with a Canon EOS Elan II and wanted to use those lenses with my Rebel. I tried a Sigma 28-200mm lens on the Rebel and took one shot. When I tried to take another shot, I got an error message. I couldn't figure out why it wouldn't work with the Rebel. Since I was wanting to convert my lenses over to Canon lenses anyway, I bought the new Canon 55-200mm lightweight lens. It is an excellent lens and I am happy with the results. I also had the Canon EF 75-300mm lens that I used with the Elan. That lens works on the Rebel and I get excellent close ups of flowers with it. It is very sharp, as are my other Canon Lenses. Since I use a tripod on almost all my shots, I didn't thing the extra cost for IM would be worth it. After all, on a tripod, you have to turn the IM feature off!



I haven't tried the teleconverters, but other photographers that I shoot with have them and have gotten good results. I bought a set of Kenko extension tubes from Adorama, which give me the ability to get closer to my subject than the lens does. I use it a lot on my 75-300 lens for flower work and it gives sharp focus with very blurred backgrounds. I have uploaded some shots here taht were taken with it, but they haven't been accepted yet.



Another thing to consider for close up work is the 2 element close up filter from Canon. Unfortunately, it is a screw in filter and you will need one for each diameter lens. They cost from $69.95 (USD) and up depending on the diameter.



That 500mm lens sounds nice, but so far, I haven't had a need for one. I usually buy what I need and make it work!! If you have any other questions, let me know!



Pat
Rebel, Canon 17-85mm, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 55-200mm, Canon 75-300mm; ...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 15:24:49 PM
Inspireme
Im not sure if i really want to go for a 500mm lens, I really want to take pictures of some birds of prey which live close to here, but I think it maybe wiser to go for a more general purpose lens 70-210 or similar. If i purchased a teleconvertor that would give me a 420mm if i needed it.



Having never used a camera with IS Im not sure how I would get along with it - it sounds excellent, I guess the newer lenses have perfected the technology better so should in theory be the best quality-wise.



Such good deals on the non "L" lenses on ebay at the moment, I guess lots of people are upgradign and selling the old lens.



thanks all for your help, If anybody has other suggestions I would love to read them :)
other junk!...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 15:55:28 PM
Ericsphotos
I forgot to mention the teleconverter you asked about. I have Kenko 1.8x teleconverter that you can use with EF lenses (not "L"). Since I bough 70-200 L lens I stopped using it. The teleconverter degrades the quality, at least this one. Sharpness goes down as well as color accuracy. Also if you put 1.8 x teleconverter and use 75-300 mm at the long end you will end up with aparture f9.0 which in some situation will not let you use autofocus. I don't need a teleconverter for my "L" lens so far but if I do I will buy one from Canon. If you are serious enough to build the quality system for your camera, save some bucks and wait untill you can afford "L" lens. It is really worth it. Excellent sharpness at all apartures, no vignietting, no discolorations,sturdy design. They are a little havier than "consumer" level lenses but carrying it will pay off.
Images processed in Photoshop CS. Previously I used Canon EOS 650, Ca...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 16:01:06 PM
Inspireme
Ok thanks im going to look into the "L" range a little deeper (what does the "L" stand for btw?)



Are all the photos in your portfolio taken with the lens you mentioned? (love your work, some very useful images in your portfolio)



I have heard mixed reviews about the teleconvertors, but if its made by canon to work with the latest lens im sure they would be a lot more impresive. Thanks again, its great to get some feedback from people with first-hand experience!
other junk!...
Posted: 08/13/2004, 16:11:21 PM
Ericsphotos
Thanks for your comment and appreciation of my work. Not all of them were taken with "L" lenses but THIS ONE was taken with 70-200 F4.0L. By the way "L" probably stands for "low distortion".
Images processed in Photoshop CS. Previously I used Canon EOS 650, Ca...
Edited: 08/14/2004, 18:33:37 PM
Wildlight
In my experience, both "L" and "IS" are worth the money (the already-mentioned 75-300 IS is an exception - while IS does its job, it's a pretty mediocre lens, I was amazed at the difference when I bought 100-400 IS L). IS performs pretty much as advertized, it allows you to hand-hold for longer exposures, 2 more stops unless you are one of very few people who can hand-hold half-second exposures, IS is not designed to suppress very slow vibrations. One exception to this rule is the 70-200 IS L, the IS is even more capable there, it adds 3 stops and works quite well for exposures longer than 0.1s.

L lenses do have better glass, which may or may not matter to you, quite a few non-L lenses are "good enough" for most people. L lenses are built better, and you feel it the moment you pick up a lens: rings move smoother, it feels sturdier.
Digital: Canon EOS 10D Film: Canon EOS 3 + Nikon LS4000
Posted: 09/05/2004, 20:31:29 PM
Garlic
This is pretty much about money.



Of course IS can be useful but not all IS lenses are good. I havent tried the Canon 75-300 IS but have heard many that says that the IS is not worth the extra money for that one.



The L lenses are most or all of top quality. And if money is not the problem I would go for them.



400/500mm and larger ar very expensive and if youre pretty new to photography Id start with something smaller and then update if you are going well.

Think Tamron 70-300mm is great for its value. Not top of the line but large zoom-range and pretty sharp. Canon 70-200 f/4.0L is very good (and of course 70-200 f/2.8 L too) and the can be used with extension tubes.



Also have to recomend the Canon 50mm prime lenses (both f/1.8 and f/1.4) for the collection.
Posted: 10/01/2004, 19:57:02 PM
Wekiwis
pbphoto said his/her Canon 300D had a macro lens as a kit when it was purchased [18-55mm]. I am not sure if that is really true. It has the capability of getting in fairly close but from my experience with my Minolta 35mm, which does have a macro lens, this Canon's 18-55 lens is not actually a macro lens. I too am one of those lucky owners of the Canon Rebel 300D digital camera. It is amazing, and when I learn to 'drive' it fully it will no doubt become even more amazing! I am wanting to get in real close to small subjects and I would like some advice from some pros as to my best options. Should I buy a macro lens, or should I get a 70-200 with a close up filter? What say ye, fellow rebel users?

Colin
Olympus E500 Evolt
Posted: 10/02/2004, 00:39:37 AM
Njpro

Originally posted by Ericsphotos:
Quoted Message: Hi guys,

I am a lucky owner of Canon 10D (an older brother of 300). Here in the US your camera is called Canon Digital Rebel as you probably know, but it doesn't matter. I used to have Canon 75-300 f4.5-5.6 IS lens. While the image stabilization was a great thing I was not happy with the overall quality. I sold it on Ebay and bought Canon 70-200 f4.0 L glass. This is an excellent lens and not very expensive. I strongly recommend this one if you want to try Canon "L" lenses.




I have to agree with you about this lens. I also use this lens on my canon 20d and love it. I do use the kit lens for wider shots, but I can tell the diference very easily from one lens to the other.



I know this is OT, but how do you add a comment to your postings with your camera info like I see on other posts?? TIA!
Canon EOS 20D with various "L" lenses.
Posted: 10/03/2004, 00:38:27 AM
Inspireme
Njpro : managment area> edit profile and then fill int he equipment box.



Thanks everybody for their comments, I havent got a lens yet unfortunatly I havent had much time for photography :( hopefully I can change that this month and look at all your suggestions ready for a shiny new lens in the new year :)
other junk!...
Posted: 10/03/2004, 18:17:05 PM
Fotoeye75

Originally posted by Wekiwis:
Quoted Message: Should I buy a macro lens, or should I get a 70-200 with a close up filter? What say ye, fellow rebel users?

Colin




Well I use a Sigma 100-300 with a close-up filter and it works .. all the macros in my portfolio were shot this way. Naturally I would rather have a macro lens but for me it comes down to should I spend 800 bucks on the macro lens I want or should I just continue to use this $12 close-up filter that I bought 15 years ago.
-- Icebreaker Sugar Free Mints...
Posted: 10/03/2004, 20:42:10 PM
Ericsphotos
Actually you don't have to spend $800 for a macro lens. Sigma has 50mm Macro EX DG lens which quite affordable and from what I heard is excellent. I hope I will be able to try it on my 10D during Photoplus Expo this month in NY. I plan to spend entire day at the show so I will have a lot to cover at the end of the month.
Images processed in Photoshop CS. Previously I used Canon EOS 650, Ca...
Posted: 10/04/2004, 21:35:47 PM
Fotoeye75
oh yeah I agree .. there's a ton of good macro lenses on the market that are cheaper ... but the one I want is $800 LOL :)
-- Icebreaker Sugar Free Mints...
Posted: 10/09/2004, 07:12:33 AM
Flex1899
I may not be one of *lucky* owners of DSLR, but I am a lucky owner of 70-200/2.8L IS lense. ^_^



Although I paid the money more than any equipment for this lense, the lense is worth every penny spent, especially if you are event-photographer. Not only the lense quality, IS helps me shoot moving people, animals, etc at low shutter speed that you might not be able to freeze with non-IS lense.
Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 1v, Elan 7e Bronica SQ-Ai Rollei 35
Posted: 12/15/2004, 16:17:10 PM
Ericsphotos
That's the lens I am buying in the first months of the next year. Did you ever use it with 2 x teleconverter? That's gonna be my next purchase.
Images processed in Photoshop CS. Previously I used Canon EOS 650, Ca...
Posted: 12/15/2004, 18:49:27 PM
Paulcowan
I don't think you mix a 2x teleconverter with a $1,600 lens, do you? Kind of undermines the point of having excellent glass. I did buy a teleconverter but I never use it now, I was too disappointed... maybe I should try it with my 17-40 f4L. though, to see how much it degrades the glass...

In any case if you stick a 2x converter on a 200mm lens with a 1.6 crop factor you end up with a 640mm equivalent or 13x magnification, which won't hold still even in a light breeze on a tripod IMHO. So you get motion blur and chromatic aberation for $1,600 +

Try moving in closer ;)
lens, 24-70 f2.8L, 1-5X 65mm macro lens and twin flash, 100mm f2.8L m...
Posted: 12/15/2004, 20:27:15 PM
Mckown
Paulcowan and "moving in closer". Great subject at least for some like I used to be. When I first started using my F4s I bought the Tamron 100-500 and I thought Wow look at what I can do from far away! And continued to use olny the 500 end, plus a lot of time with 1.4x even when I could get a lot closer. Took a while to learn how bad that turns out. I notice a lot of people do just that now. From the great pics here I dont think anyone here does such a thing. If ya do, "quit it" Best to all!!
VR ...
Posted: 12/15/2004, 21:37:53 PM
Showing posts 1 - 20 of 34 Page:
1
 2 >
 of 2