Lens for Canon 400D

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by christopher, Dec 28, 2006.

  1. christopher

    christopher Guest

    I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance
     
    christopher, Dec 28, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. >I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    > condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    > mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    > need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    > am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance



    Keep in mind that your 50 becomes an 85 and your 100/300 goes to 166/500 on
    the Rebel series. So you've got the portraing & long end covered, but have
    nothing remotely wide. I've got the 17-85IS which has worked very well for
    me, but you'll get opinions all over the map on it, mostly dealing with it
    being relatively expensive and whether the IS is really worth it (for me, it
    is). But if money is a big issue, you might just try out the kit lens that
    comes with the camera. For $100 it's not much of a gamble.

    --Mike Jacoubowsky
    Chain Reaction Bicycles
    www.ChainReaction.com
    Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA


    "christopher" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    > condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    > mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    > need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    > am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance
    >
     
    Mike Jacoubowsky, Dec 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. christopher

    christopher Guest

    Thanks for the advice. I'll probably go with the kit lens like you
    suggest and then see.
    Mike Jacoubowsky a écrit :

    > >I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    > > condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    > > mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    > > need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    > > am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance

    >
    >
    > Keep in mind that your 50 becomes an 85 and your 100/300 goes to 166/500 on
    > the Rebel series. So you've got the portraing & long end covered, but have
    > nothing remotely wide. I've got the 17-85IS which has worked very well for
    > me, but you'll get opinions all over the map on it, mostly dealing with it
    > being relatively expensive and whether the IS is really worth it (for me, it
    > is). But if money is a big issue, you might just try out the kit lens that
    > comes with the camera. For $100 it's not much of a gamble.
    >
    > --Mike Jacoubowsky
    > Chain Reaction Bicycles
    > www.ChainReaction.com
    > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
    >
    >
    > "christopher" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    > > condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    > > mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    > > need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    > > am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance
    > >
     
    christopher, Dec 29, 2006
    #3
  4. christopher

    John Guest

    Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
    >> I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    >> condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    >> mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    >> need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    >> am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance

    >
    >
    > Keep in mind that your 50 becomes an 85 and your 100/300 goes to 166/500 on
    > the Rebel series. So you've got the portraing & long end covered, but have
    > nothing remotely wide. I've got the 17-85IS which has worked very well for
    > me, but you'll get opinions all over the map on it, mostly dealing with it
    > being relatively expensive and whether the IS is really worth it (for me, it
    > is). But if money is a big issue, you might just try out the kit lens that
    > comes with the camera. For $100 it's not much of a gamble.
    >
    > --Mike Jacoubowsky
    > Chain Reaction Bicycles
    > www.ChainReaction.com
    > Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
    >
    >
    > "christopher" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> I am planning to purchase a Canon 4OOD SLR. I have two old but in good
    >> condition Canon lenses that I used with a Canon 35 mm SLR. They are 50
    >> mm 1:1.8 and 100 x 300 1:4.5-5.6. Please recommend what other lens I
    >> need to cover the basic range for people and landscape photography. I
    >> am trying to keep expenses under control...Thanks in advance
    >>

    >
    >


    I tried the $69 Canon 50mm f1.8 lens for my 400D. I couldn't get it to
    properly auto-focus. If I was careful I could manually focus and obtain
    a good photograph. That led me to the conclusion that the glass was
    good, but the auto-focus was off. The problem is that the manual focus
    ring is extremely thin and adjustments are coarse. I returned it.

    Based upon all the great reviews, I then bought the Canon 50mm f1.4 lens
    ($300+/-). The results were less than great.

    I put the camera on a tripod. Delayed shutter release and locked up the
    mirror. Shot in raw mode. Photographed a static object at a variety of
    apertures since I read that f1.4 isn't too sharp.

    I removed the lens and put on my 24-105 Canon lens and shot a number of
    pictures of the same static object at various apertures.

    I viewed the results in Photoshop's Camera Raw with sharpness turned
    off. In every case, the results from the zoom lens were significantly
    better. f1.4 produced fairly fuzzy results but the photographs improved
    as I stopped down the aperture.

    I would have thought a prime lens would have produced photographs as
    good if not better than a zoom lens. I wasn't in the mood for sending
    the lens to Canon for a warranty adjustment so I simply returned it
    (free return shipping).
     
    John, Dec 29, 2006
    #4
  5. christopher

    Lionel Guest

    On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 10:27:30 -0500, John <> wrote:

    >I tried the $69 Canon 50mm f1.8 lens for my 400D. I couldn't get it to
    >properly auto-focus. If I was careful I could manually focus and obtain
    >a good photograph. That led me to the conclusion that the glass was
    >good, but the auto-focus was off. The problem is that the manual focus
    >ring is extremely thin and adjustments are coarse. I returned it.
    >
    >Based upon all the great reviews, I then bought the Canon 50mm f1.4 lens
    >($300+/-). The results were less than great.
    >
    >I put the camera on a tripod. Delayed shutter release and locked up the
    >mirror. Shot in raw mode. Photographed a static object at a variety of
    >apertures since I read that f1.4 isn't too sharp.
    >
    >I removed the lens and put on my 24-105 Canon lens and shot a number of
    >pictures of the same static object at various apertures.
    >
    >I viewed the results in Photoshop's Camera Raw with sharpness turned
    >off. In every case, the results from the zoom lens were significantly
    >better. f1.4 produced fairly fuzzy results but the photographs improved
    >as I stopped down the aperture.
    >
    >I would have thought a prime lens would have produced photographs as
    >good if not better than a zoom lens.


    If they're in good working order, & - most importantly - are being
    used correctly, that is the case.
    Based on your description of the problems, the most likely
    explanation is that there's either a problem with the focussing on
    your 400d or a problem with your technique. FWIW, the depth of field
    at f1.4-f1.8 is very, very shallow, & you should expect AF hassles
    with it - especially on the lower-end DSLRs like the 400D, which
    aren't designed or calibrated for the same AF accuracy as the
    professional bodies. I own both those lenses & have worked them very
    hard at apertures ranging from wide open (f1.4/f1.8) to around F4,
    with results that're consistantly sharper than any of my 'L' zooms.
    Even wide open, both lenses are sharp enough to easily resolve
    individual hairs in a subject's eyebrows or eyelashes in a handheld
    snapshot - as long as the lens is *exactly* focussed on them.
     
    Lionel, Dec 29, 2006
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Stimp

    which lens to get for Canon 400D?

    Stimp, Oct 13, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    537
  2. Best second lens for Canon 400D

    , Dec 7, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    699
    Ståle Sannerud
    Dec 8, 2006
  3. 4NGs
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,538
  4. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,439
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
  5. Ray Fischer

    Re: Which telephoto lens to get for Canon 400D (sub-$800)

    Ray Fischer, Dec 21, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    415
    Paul Furman
    Dec 21, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page