Canon DSLR Lenses

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

nash

Super Freak
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
15,378
Reaction score
9
Location
HI
Just picked up a 450D at a good price.

Any of you photogs out there, what would you recommend as a mid priced 'all purpose' lens? Looking to spend up to $500 at most right now until I get better at this new hobby.

I have my eye on the Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS but that's going to have to wait for me to spend $1k on a single lens...
 
I use a 28mm-200mm EF lens for all my photos. Covers a great range from fairly close up too a good distance away, works for full view shots and pretty good on closeups, not Macro quality, but nice enough.
 

It's built into the lens to couter act camera shake, otherwise known as "IS"

Image stabilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization
 
It's built into the lens to couter act camera shake, otherwise known as "IS"

Image stabilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_stabilization

Oh, I didn't know you were writing it short hand, now I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't think Canon even makes lenses without IS technology built in anymore. I believe the Ultrasonic in mine is like super advanced IS.

I've had zero complaints with the lens I have, I look forward to broadening my collection one day, really would love some Macro stuff for my collectibles work, but I've got buy with just this one so it's served me well.

Here are some samples of what I've done with it.

4.jpg


5.jpg


3.jpg
 
nice stuff MF. how much should i expect to pay for your lens? maybe ill try to bid on that auction you posted
 
I need to get a lens like that but everytime I do we get times like this. Most of the time when I'm taking shots or at SDCC cause its so upclose I just use my standard 18-55mm lens.
 
I think ive decided on a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 for now. $340, not a big deal and a definite improvement over the kit lens. i think next i'll be saving up for the 24-105 f4
 
yeah, not looking to spend serious cash yet as im not a serious photog yet either. when i get there, ill have no problems upgrading.

I got my tamron 17-50mm yesterday, been too busy working to try it out but im off friday so i'll take my camera for a stroll down times square and central park and see what it can do.
 
Tamron makes great lenses if you want to go the economic route, I have a 75-300 from Tamron myself and it's a great lens for the price I paid!

I've been looking at their 18-250mm one. What camera are you using it on? I have a Nikon D40.
 
Just picked up a 450D at a good price.

Any of you photogs out there, what would you recommend as a mid priced 'all purpose' lens? Looking to spend up to $500 at most right now until I get better at this new hobby.

I have my eye on the Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS but that's going to have to wait for me to spend $1k on a single lens...

I think for 'all purpose' in your range, you could go for something like the EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
https://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=17518

But take note, on these types of super zooms, while you gain a huge range with a single lens, there is a sacrifice with image quality. This somewhat negates the entire point of buying such a big camera that can change lenses. You may as well buy one of their high end models from their Powershot line.

The best option for using DSLRs is to have a small set of quality lenses that cover your needed focal range. That way you maintain the maximum image quality available to you. Or just get the ones that you would shoot the most.

My top (affordable) recommended specialized lenses:
10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 - Best wide angle for crop bodies
17-55 f/2.8 IS - fantastic all rounder. Great depth of field and low light performance. Could easily be labeled an 'L' lens.
50mm f/1.8 II - this could be the best lens ever created. Its like $100 dollars and puts out the sharpest images your camera sensor can make. Price plus image clarity make this one a no brainer. Note is has no zoom, but it will bring out your creative side.
Extension tubes - buy a cheap set of kenko extension tubes, stick it on your 50mm lens, and you have just made the world's most cost efficient macro lens.

And more. ask around. tons of lenses out there. you dont have to stick to canon ones either. good luck.


Oh, I didn't know you were writing it short hand, now I know exactly what you're talking about. I don't think Canon even makes lenses without IS technology built in anymore. I believe the Ultrasonic in mine is like super advanced IS.

Image stabilizing technology counter shakes the optics to balance the small shakes that occur while hand holding. It is not a miracle worker and its benefit is minimal and only functional at slower shutter speeds. Its usefulness can be somewhat negated with wider apertures or tripods. I would say IS gives you about half to a full stop benefit.

It is not standard on canon lenses, it varies depending on the model.

Also 'Ultrasonic' is not related to IS, it simply refers to the motor that drives the autofocus. (USM)
 
im looking into the 17-55mm f2.8 IS as my walk-around lens in the future. Im not too into the super zoom focal lengths yet. I don't do wildlife photography or sports or anything like that so I really dont need that reach.

From what Ive read it could definitely be labeled an "L" lens, but its a shame it isnt because having it weather-sealed would have been nice for paying L lens price.
 
The 17-55 is not built like an L. I can't comment on the optics as I've never used one. (An EF-S mount lens at 1k+ is not attractive to me)


17-40L and 70-200 F/4L are my current workhorses.
 
The 17-55 is not built like an L. I can't comment on the optics as I've never used one. (An EF-S mount lens at 1k+ is not attractive to me)


17-40L and 70-200 F/4L are my current workhorses.


I feel the same about the 17-55. I love that it is wide for a crop body that I have and that it has both IS and f2.8....but paying L prices for less than L quality has me finding it hard to pull the trigger.

I find myself looking towards the 24-70 2.8 or 24-105 4.0 a whole lot more for around the same price as the 17-55.
 
Back
Top