What lens to get for my 350D

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Eatmorepies, Mar 27, 2005.

  1. Eatmorepies

    Eatmorepies Guest

    As I wrote in my previous post - the kit lens is very slow. What to buy?

    I have a 35 to 70 mm from my film EOS which is a little faster, but that's
    for a full frame sensor and I have read that lenses designed to work with a
    half frame sensor do a better job. At the moment these lenses seem few in
    number. Sigma offer digital specific lenses. Are they any good?

    Does anyone have recent experience of a good 70 to 200mm on a DSLR?

    Does anyone have views on the unsuitability of film SLR lenses used on a
    DSLR? Because what I would like to stick on the 350D is a 50mm f1.8 Canon
    prime.

    John
     
    Eatmorepies, Mar 27, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Eatmorepies

    Charles Guest

    I have one. That lens works great on the Canon DSLR's.
     
    Charles, Mar 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Eatmorepies

    Pete D Guest

    Get the kit 18-50mm or whatever they are pretty good, I find that the
    70-200mm is not quite big enough look at something bigger, the Sigma lenses
    are pretty good for the price also look at the Tamron Xr Di range, not too
    bad. Any of the Canon IS zoom lenses will be good.
     
    Pete D, Mar 27, 2005
    #3
  4. Eatmorepies

    Your-Nice Guest

    It will = a 56 to 112 and should be fine even better than on your film
    camera because with the 1.6 crop more of the centre part of the lens is used
    ..eos fit is eos .your 50 f1.8 will = 80mm a great portrait lens ,oh and dont
    forget to take into account camera shake your 50mm is not 50mm but 80mm
     
    Your-Nice, Mar 27, 2005
    #4
  5. Eatmorepies

    Skip M Guest

    Well, my 50mm f1.8 works just fine on my 20D, as do my 100 f2, 15 f2.8
    fisheye, 28-135 IS, 100-400 IS, etc. Should do the same for your 350D. By
    the way, my friend's 70-200 f2.8 IS works fine on his 1D mkII...
     
    Skip M, Mar 28, 2005
    #5
  6. Eatmorepies

    Skip M Guest

    "70-200 not quite big enough look at something bigger." Huh? That lens is
    one of the finest lenses made, whether zoom or fixed focal length. With the
    crop factor of the 350D, that takes the place of a 112-360mm lens, certainly
    enough to get what he wants, especially since he said that was the focal
    length he was considering. Give him enough credit to know what his needs
    are. Besides, anything "bigger" will be either slower or horrendously more
    expensive than either the 70-200 f4 or 70-200 f2.8 IS, the latter is already
    over $1000.
    He also said the kit lens was too slow, so recommending he get the "kit
    18-50," actually -55, isn't what he needs. And Sigma lenses, while cheap,
    aren't exactly top drawer. Some are, most aren't. The Tamron XR range has
    been reviewed has being pretty dire, not up to the standards of the ATX Pro
    line.
    Would have to agree with the statement about Canon IS lenses, except that
    you "dis-recommended" one of them in your second sentence
     
    Skip M, Mar 28, 2005
    #6
  7. I have a 35 to 70 mm from my film EOS which is a little faster, but that's
    You've got a few replies on the issues of specific lenses, but no one has
    picked up on the confusion quoted above.

    Lenses that are designed to work with a half frame sensor are optically
    pretty much the same as full frame sensor lenses. Some good, some not so
    good, you pays yer money, etc., etc. The difference is that they take
    advantage of the fact that they only have to put their image on a smaller
    area, so they can be smaller, lighter, maybe made from different materials
    and so on. In the Canon world these types of lenses are named "EF-S", and
    they only work with smaller sensor DSLR cameras - you can't put one of your
    film EOS. The majority of current Canon lenses are still full frame, and
    will work on either type of camera AFAIK.
     
    Derek Fountain, Mar 28, 2005
    #7
  8. The Tamron XR range
    The Tamron SP AF28-75/2.8 XR Di looks OK, according to Bob:

    http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/tamron_28_75.html

    Any reason to believe that one's not as good as the review makes it out to
    be? (Say he, seriously thinking about getting one!)
     
    Derek Fountain, Mar 28, 2005
    #8
  9. Eatmorepies

    Skip M Guest

    No, no reason at all. I was speaking of an entire line, not an individual
    lens, as was Pete. That lens intrigues me, too.
     
    Skip M, Mar 28, 2005
    #9
  10. Eatmorepies

    Pete D Guest


    Skip, you assume far too much, not what I was thinking at all. I said the
    70-200 is probably not big enough, get a ??-300 or 400, buy once rather than
    many times, fine if you have lots of cash but I "assume" because he is
    getting a 350D he cannot afford a 20D or a 1D and therefore would be better
    served with a larger size range rather than having to buy a complete of
    other lenses later. Look at the Sigma 80-400mm APO HSM optically stabilised.
     
    Pete D, Mar 28, 2005
    #10
  11. Eatmorepies

    Skip M Guest

    But that Sigma is a 4.5-5.6, he already said the kit lens wasn't fast
    enough. The Canon 70-200 lenses are either f4 or f2.8. And he can add a
    teleconverter for the difference in price between the 70-200 lenses and an
    80- or 100-400, and still have a very fast lens up to 200mm.
    I was going to add that the Sigma isn't significantly less expensive than
    the Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 IS USM, but much poorer in image quality, but
    they've dropped the price of the Sigma significantly, down to $999 at B&H,
    against the Canon's $1410, it used to be only $200 less. Sigma's 70-200
    f2.8 is similarly less expensive than the Canon version, at $799.
     
    Skip M, Mar 28, 2005
    #11
  12. Eatmorepies

    Chris Brown Guest

    There's nothing particularly unsuitable about them.
    Go for it - makes a nice low-cost portrait lens. However, if you're willing
    to spend the extra, the 50mm f/1.4 is really superb.
     
    Chris Brown, Mar 29, 2005
    #12
  13. Eatmorepies

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    Tokina 12-24/4

    Canon 24-70/2.8 L

    Canon 70-200/2.8 L IS

    All take 77 filters and are among the best in class.
    The Minolta 70-210/2.8 SSM outscores the Canon in most tests,
    and the Tamron 28-75/2.8 Di outpoints the Canon in some tests
    but not in others (but it doesn't take 77 filters).
     
    Bill Tuthill, Mar 29, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.