That 18-50 lens for the 300D

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mike Graham, Sep 7, 2003.

  1. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Guest

    I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that lens
    doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then it will still
    be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you buying the kit or are you
    buying the body only?

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Mike Graham | Metalworker, rustic, part-time zealot.
    mike 'at' metalmangler.com |
    <http://www.metalmangler.com>| Caledon, Ontario, Canada

    Lousy photographer with a really nice camera - Olympus C3020Zoom.
    <http://www.metalmangler.com/photos/photos.htm>
     
    Mike Graham, Sep 7, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mike Graham

    W6DKN Guest

    Mike Graham wrote:
    > I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that
    > lens doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then
    > it will still be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you
    > buying the kit or are you buying the body only?


    How many $100 dollar zoom lenses are there that aren't crap? I'm sure that
    the Canon marketing people figure the target buying group for this camera
    probably couldn't tell a good lens from a bad one, but many won't buy it
    unless it comes with a lens - so there's your $100 zoom...

    = Dan =
     
    W6DKN, Sep 8, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mike Graham

    Mark B. Guest

    "Mike Graham" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that lens
    > doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then it will

    still
    > be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you buying the kit or are

    you
    > buying the body only?
    >



    Overview & comparison to other lenses:

    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos300d/page16.asp
     
    Mark B., Sep 8, 2003
    #3
  4. That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.



    Mike Graham <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that lens
    > doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then it will still
    > be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you buying the kit or are you
    > buying the body only?
     
    Monica Krowley, Sep 8, 2003
    #4
  5. Mike Graham

    MarkH Guest

    (Monica Krowley) wrote in
    news::

    > Mike Graham <> wrote in message
    > news:<>...
    >> I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that
    >> lens doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then
    >> it will still be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you
    >> buying the kit or are you buying the body only?


    > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.


    Maybe, but on the 300D you can also buy a 50mm f1.8 that will give sharper
    clearer pics than the G3 is capable of.

    You can also spend real money and get many fantastic lenses, including
    equivalent FOV 320mm at f1.8 and equiv of 640mm at 2.8. I don’t think that
    a G3 or any other compact camera can compete with that.






    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~markh/
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, Sep 8, 2003
    #5
  6. Mark, I never said that the G3 was better than the rebel. I said that
    the lens that comes with the G3 is better than the shitty kit lens
    that you can buy with the rebel. If someone has the money to buy the
    rebel body and a few good prime lenses, then the quality of the DSLR
    will be worth the investment. I would suggest the 1.4 50mm USM lens
    instead of the 1.8 version. Better build quality and the USM internal
    focusing.....plus the extra speed and sharpness.



    MarkH <> wrote in message news:<bjgvu1$lea$>...
    > (Monica Krowley) wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > Mike Graham <> wrote in message
    > > news:<>...
    > >> I was just looking at the specs on the new Digital Rebel, and that
    > >> lens doesn't really excite me, however if it's not a crap lens then
    > >> it will still be worth the $100. What's the consensus? Are you
    > >> buying the kit or are you buying the body only?

    >
    > > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.

    >
    > Maybe, but on the 300D you can also buy a 50mm f1.8 that will give sharper
    > clearer pics than the G3 is capable of.
    >
    > You can also spend real money and get many fantastic lenses, including
    > equivalent FOV 320mm at f1.8 and equiv of 640mm at 2.8. I don?t think that
    > a G3 or any other compact camera can compete with that.
     
    Monica Krowley, Sep 8, 2003
    #6
  7. Mike Graham

    Wayne J Guest

    "Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.
    >

    So what if it's slow? Set the camera to ISO 800 and it will blow the G3 away
    in any category.

    Wayne
     
    Wayne J, Sep 8, 2003
    #7
  8. Mike Graham

    Mark B. Guest

    "Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Mark, I never said that the G3 was better than the rebel. I said that
    > the lens that comes with the G3 is better than the shitty kit lens
    > that you can buy with the rebel. If someone has the money to buy the
    > rebel body and a few good prime lenses, then the quality of the DSLR
    > will be worth the investment. I would suggest the 1.4 50mm USM lens
    > instead of the 1.8 version. Better build quality and the USM internal
    > focusing.....plus the extra speed and sharpness.
    >
    >
    >
    >


    Anyone looking to buy the 300D is doing it for cost reasons; they're
    unlikely to consider spending 3x the price of the 50/1.8 for the 1.4
    version.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Sep 8, 2003
    #8
  9. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Guest

    In article <>, Monica Krowley wrote:

    > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.


    Then lens on my C3020 is much better, from a speed perspective, but
    looking at the tryout on dpreviews, it looks like a decent bit of kit for
    $100.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Mike Graham | Metalworker, rustic, part-time zealot.
    mike 'at' metalmangler.com |
    <http://www.metalmangler.com>| Caledon, Ontario, Canada

    Lousy photographer with a really nice camera - Olympus C3020Zoom.
    <http://www.metalmangler.com/photos/photos.htm>
     
    Mike Graham, Sep 8, 2003
    #9
  10. "Mark B." <> wrote:
    > "Monica Krowley" <> wrote:


    > > Mark, I never said that the G3 was better than the rebel. I said that
    > > the lens that comes with the G3 is better than the shitty kit lens
    > > that you can buy with the rebel. If someone has the money to buy the
    > > rebel body and a few good prime lenses, then the quality of the DSLR
    > > will be worth the investment. I would suggest the 1.4 50mm USM lens
    > > instead of the 1.8 version. Better build quality and the USM internal
    > > focusing.....plus the extra speed and sharpness.


    > Anyone looking to buy the 300D is doing it for cost reasons; they're
    > unlikely to consider spending 3x the price of the 50/1.8 for the 1.4
    > version.


    Actually, I think she's right on that point. It's the cheapest fast lens
    Canon makes, and it's better than the 50/1.8 in several way, including
    bokeh. For portraits, the 50/1.8 could be a bit harsh and the 50/1.4 a lot
    smoother. The extra 2/3 of a stop isn't really a big deal, but it makes the
    finder brighter and focusing faster and more accurate. Also it's USM vs.
    non-USM. The large number of small advantages really add up. The only bad
    news is that it has a bit of barrel distortion, something that's more of a
    problem at the edges of the frame when used on film or with a full-frame
    sensor.

    Another fast lens on my list is the Stigma 24/1.8. It's a bit of a clunker,
    but 40mm is a nice length for general shooting, and it's reported to be the
    best of the fast Sigma wide angles.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Sep 8, 2003
    #10
  11. Mike Graham

    ajacobs2 Guest

    "Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.



    And you have personnaly tested that lens and can testify to this?
     
    ajacobs2, Sep 8, 2003
    #11
  12. Mike Graham

    Charlie Self Guest

    Al Jacobs asks:

    >"Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.

    >
    >
    >And you have personnaly tested that lens and can testify to this?
    >


    Al, Al. You know better. She heard someone she considers an expert make the
    statement that it sucks. Totally. Too slow. and on.

    People who have used it seem to think it's an OK lens, especially for the
    price.

    Charlie Self

    "Men willingly believe what they wish."
    Julius Caesar, De Bello Gallico
     
    Charlie Self, Sep 8, 2003
    #12
  13. Mike Graham

    HRosita Guest

    >"ajacobs2" wrote:

    >And you have personnaly tested that lens and can testify to this?


    Hi,

    I had the same feeling exactly. Love the "experts" that have such strong well
    researched opinions.
    Now if they could just give us some advice about how to take super pictures
    with their type of lens I might be inclined to read future message from them.
    Until then, the X on the corner of the message gets a good workout.
    Rosita
     
    HRosita, Sep 8, 2003
    #13
  14. Mike Graham

    Lisa Horton Guest

    ajacobs2 wrote:
    >
    > "Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.

    >
    > And you have personnaly tested that lens and can testify to this?


    My thoughts exactly, you beat me to it Al. I wonder if "Monica Krowley"
    is married to "Michael Scarpitti" ? :)

    Lisa
     
    Lisa Horton, Sep 8, 2003
    #14
  15. Mike Graham

    Lisa Horton Guest

    HRosita wrote:
    >
    > >"ajacobs2" wrote:

    >
    > >And you have personnaly tested that lens and can testify to this?

    >
    > Hi,
    >
    > I had the same feeling exactly. Love the "experts" that have such strong well
    > researched opinions.
    > Now if they could just give us some advice about how to take super pictures
    > with their type of lens I might be inclined to read future message from them.
    > Until then, the X on the corner of the message gets a good workout.
    > Rosita


    In all fairness Rosita, the usual Canon kit lenses ARE crap. I know,
    I've tried a few. My first AF SLR was a Rebel G with the 35-80 kit
    lens. I was dismayed that my pictures were not as sharp as those
    produce by my 15 year old off-brand zoom.

    However, it's starting to look like this lens may be the exception to
    the (kit lens) rule. I guess we'll all find out soon enough.

    BTW, I did order the lens too, as I can see a use for an especially
    light and small lens, and for $100 if it's anything better than crap, it
    will be well worth the price.

    Lisa
     
    Lisa Horton, Sep 8, 2003
    #15
  16. Cheap, but good zoom lenses. Was: Re: That 18-50 lens for the 300D (eolake stobblehouse)


    >
    > How many $100 dollar zoom lenses are there that aren't crap?


    I don't know, but there is one. Not being made anymore, I think. I read
    this:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2880.htm

    And bought it used. And the optics rule, even if mechanically it
    obviously feels cheap.

    I warmly recommend Ken Rockwell's articles. I also bought:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/7021056.htm
    on his recommendation and I love it.

    Eolake Stobblehouse

    --
    - Eolake
    --

    http://MacCreator.com
     
    Eolake Stobblehouse, Sep 8, 2003
    #16
  17. Mike Graham

    Wayne J Guest

    "Mike Graham" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>, Monica

    Krowley wrote:
    >
    > > That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.

    >
    > Then lens on my C3020 is much better, from a speed perspective, but
    > looking at the tryout on dpreviews, it looks like a decent bit of kit for
    > $100.


    Even though that kit lens is not all that great, the digital rebel with that
    lens will completely outclass any of the point and shoot small sensor
    cameras because it has a far better sensor. Comparing the speed of an
    Olympus 3020 lens with the speed of that 18-50 lens is silly. It's not like
    you can take your Olympus lens and put it on a different sensor. You have to
    consider the end results not just the specification of one component of the
    system.

    Wayne
     
    Wayne J, Sep 8, 2003
    #17
  18. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Guest

    In article <T067b.1425$>, Wayne J wrote:

    > Even though that kit lens is not all that great, the digital rebel with that
    > lens will completely outclass any of the point and shoot small sensor
    > cameras because it has a far better sensor.


    That was the point I was making.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Mike Graham | Metalworker, rustic, part-time zealot.
    mike 'at' metalmangler.com |
    <http://www.metalmangler.com>| Caledon, Ontario, Canada

    Lousy photographer with a really nice camera - Olympus C3020Zoom.
    <http://www.metalmangler.com/photos/photos.htm>
     
    Mike Graham, Sep 8, 2003
    #18
  19. Mike Graham

    Guest

    In message <msY6b.2983$>,
    "Wayne J" <> wrote:

    >"Monica Krowley" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> That lens sucks. Totally. Too slow. The lens on the G3 is much better.
    >>

    >So what if it's slow? Set the camera to ISO 800 and it will blow the G3 away
    >in any category.


    Here's the what of it being slow:

    You don't get all the noise benefit of the 300D, because you may have to
    use a higher ISO to maintain shutter speed.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Sep 10, 2003
    #19
  20. Mike Graham

    Mike Graham Guest

    In article <>, wrote:

    > Maybe it's a lot easier to make a good $100 zoom that only needs to
    > focus on a 22.5mm*15mm rectangle than a 36mm*24mm rectangle, though.


    I think you may have hit the nail on the head, right there. With the
    relatively small CCD you're only using 'the best part of the lens', so given
    that it can't be used on a film camera (because of the way it mounts) maybe
    they could cut corners on some of the glass without it affecting the
    operation.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Mike Graham | Metalworker, rustic, part-time zealot.
    mike 'at' metalmangler.com |
    <http://www.metalmangler.com>| Caledon, Ontario, Canada

    Lousy photographer with a really nice camera - Olympus C3020Zoom.
    <http://www.metalmangler.com/photos/photos.htm>
     
    Mike Graham, Sep 10, 2003
    #20
    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. Browntimdc

    Canon 300D Rebel kit lens not "slow"

    Browntimdc, Sep 9, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    689
    Tom Monego
    Sep 17, 2003
  2. Bryce

    75-300 zoom EF Canon lens for 300D

    Bryce, Sep 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    331
    Jim Townsend
    Sep 17, 2003
  3. Hans Joergensen

    Hong Kong prices on 300D, Canon S40+S45 + equipment for the 300D

    Hans Joergensen, Jan 25, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,516
    =?Big5-HKSCS?B?uXG4o6RwpGw=?=
    Jan 26, 2004
  4. fatboybrando

    EOS 300D & EOS 300D Rebel

    fatboybrando, Mar 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    460
    fatboybrando
    Mar 26, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    984
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page