Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > No shame in being a newbie (what kind of lenses do I need)?

Reply
Thread Tools

No shame in being a newbie (what kind of lenses do I need)?

 
 
Hank Pharthinurfais
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-23-2003
> Until a full review comes out, you don't know how good or bad the 18-55 zoom
> is.


If it is a Canon lens, it will rule.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Michael Scarpitti
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-23-2003
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Rupert) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> Ok, I am ready to buy the Canon 300D/Digital Rebel when it comes out
> (assuming the reviews are good).


Why?

Without any prior SLR experience, can
> someone please tell me what lenses I will need?


Impossible to do without knowing what interests you have,

> I will be buying the
> kit, so I get one. I would like to try to get away with only
> purchasing one other.


Why?

> I want to be able to take macro shots (probably
> 25% of what I will use it for).


Macro shots of what?

>Being a newbie, I don't want to spend
> too much on equipment, but at the same time, I want a lense that is
> going to be useful for a long time, and will continue to be useful as
> I get better (ie, it will survive my hopefully increasing scruitiny).


It 'lens', not 'lense'.
>
> Thanks for any help....
>
> Rupert

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
JK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-23-2003


"Mark B." wrote:

> "JK" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> >
> > "Ed E." wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with the other poster. The lens looks cheap and will probably

> only
> > > provide meodicre images, but that will remain to be confirmed when the
> > > reviews start pouring in.
> > >
> > > Invest your money in the lenses. Don't be tempted to save a few bucks

> by
> > > buying off-brands. Here are some good macro lenses:
> > >
> > > Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 macro - $230
> > > Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 macro - $420
> > > Sigma 105mm f/2.8 macro (slow and noisy focus, but very sharp images) -

> $360
> > >
> > > I normally steer away from Sigma, but that lens is really, really sharp.
> > >
> > > One inexpensive, non-macro lens to get is the 50mm f/1.8 for about $65.

> >
> > If he is getting a 50mm f2.5 macro lens, then he should also get a 50mm

> f1.4
> > rather than the f1.8. If he is getting a 50mm macro lens much slower than
> > f2.5, then the f1.8 would be such a bad purchase

>
> ut for a newbie, is it worth more than 3x the cost of the 1.8? The 1.8 is
> pretty darn sharp for under $90.


The 50mm f1.4 lens is $270? That is a bit expensive. I am used to buying
used manual focus lenses, and a 50mm f1.4 might only be around $50
or so. The f1.4 lens probably also has a much better build quality, and
will probably last much longer. I wonder if there are adapters so that one
can use old manual focus lenses on a digital slr. Some great very sharp
used manual focus lenses are very cheap now.

> Yes, there is a speed difference but again
> I'm not sure it's worth the cost.
>
> >. I see no reason for him to
> > buy a 100mm macro lens, especially due to the 1.6 x factor for that

> camera.
> > A 50mm macro lens would be the equivalent of an 80mm macro lens on
> > a 35mm slr, which is a good portrait lens as well.
> >

>
> I'd agree with that, a 50mm macro would be very good on the 300D.
>
> Mark


 
Reply With Quote
 
JK
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-23-2003
extension tubes used with a regular lens are not a good substitute
for a macro lens. Regular lenses are optimized for focusing on
infinity, while macro lenses are optimized for focusing at small
distances. A macro lens will give a much flatter depth of field
at small distances than a regular lens. A macro lens also has
much more variation in its focusing ring, which makes taking
macro images much easier than swapping expension tubes
a few times(I did that years ago before getting my first macro
lens). The images from macro lenses(especially at high
magnification) are far superior to those from a normal lens.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark B.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-24-2003
"JK" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
> "Mark B." wrote:
>
> >
> > ut for a newbie, is it worth more than 3x the cost of the 1.8? The 1.8

is
> > pretty darn sharp for under $90.

>
> The 50mm f1.4 lens is $270? That is a bit expensive. I am used to buying
> used manual focus lenses, and a 50mm f1.4 might only be around $50
> or so. The f1.4 lens probably also has a much better build quality, and
> will probably last much longer. I wonder if there are adapters so that one
> can use old manual focus lenses on a digital slr. Some great very sharp
> used manual focus lenses are very cheap now.
>


Actually, it's worse than that. $300 at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...u=12140&is=USA

Gray market is still $285. I don't know if there are adapters. It's not a
bad idea, but I don't know if I would like losing AF capability completely.

Mark


 
Reply With Quote
 
John
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-04-2003
> > A macro lens will give a much flatter depth of field
> > at small distances than a regular lens.

>
> At the same focus distance, with the same focal length, DoF is the
> same with a macro lens or a normal lens with extension tube.
>
> http://digitcamera.tripod.com/


Flat field is not the same as DOF.

A normal lens using tubes to get close will "curve" the edges of the frame
giving them soft focus. The assumption with these lenses is that you are not
taking critical images of stamps, coins, etc. with them. The edges are not
at the same distance as the center.

A macro lens assumes you will be shooting close and corrects the field
("flat" field) to insure that the images are clear across the frame and that
the edges ARE at the same distance as the center. When shooting "normal"
shots with a macro lens, the effect is so small that it doesn't matter.

This is one reason why a lens with "macro features" built in is not as good
as a true macro lens.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Control Events renamed in ASPX - What a shame Mikeon ASP .Net 2 03-16-2006 02:51 PM
Re: Shame on B&H Frankhartx Digital Photography 25 08-19-2003 03:57 AM
Shame on B&H Shane & Kimberly Gilbert Digital Photography 71 08-18-2003 11:20 AM
Re: Shame on B&H BandHPhoto Digital Photography 8 08-12-2003 03:38 PM
Re: Shame on B&H BandHPhoto Digital Photography 4 08-11-2003 10:31 PM



Advertisments