Lens recommendations please

[swift412]

I will hopefully getting a Canon 350D w/ kitlens soon, and I was hoping I could get some recommendations for lenses. The majority of my photos will be landscape stuff, so I'm leaning more towards wider prime lenses.

First on my list is the 50mm f/1.8, but I was thinking of skipping it and just going straight for a 28mm f/2.8, because it's wider, and it's only about R1000 more, and then maybe just picking up the 50mm for occasional people photos at a later stage.

What say you people?

 

[stix]

The 50mm is a great lens...indispensable if you will....in terms of cost, sharpness etc

+1

 

[BigAl-sa]

Neither the 50, nor the 28 are very wide on the 350d if you're into landscapes, unless you want to do stitching. Have a look at something like the Sigma 10-20.

 

[Digilus]

if you're into landscapes, unless you want to do stitching. Have a look at something like the Sigma 10-20.

Just a word of caution - that 10-20 is a Sigma DC Lens (which means it is meant for smaller sensors). If you ever intend to upgrade to a full-frame sensor, might I recommend the 12-24 Sigma EX DG F4.5-5.6 - really nice lens and minimal distortion too (no weird fish eye barrel distortion) I bet it cost more but if you intend to put money into good glass to keep, it is probably not a bad purchase.

 

[arf9999]

Neither the 50, nor the 28 are very wide on the 350d if you're into landscapes, unless you want to do stitching. Have a look at something like the Sigma 10-20.

+1. If you're looking for a wide lens, I'd be looking at a 15mm or 18mm prime. (15*1.6 = 24mm equivalent, 18mm ~29mm on 35mm)

A 28mm is effectively a 45mm lens on a Canon, which is not very wide.

http://www.sacamera.co.za/productdetail/c2535A004AA/Canon-EF-15mm-f2.8-USM-FISH-EYE-LENS.html
http://sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3279&navigator=4


Or you could go really wide:
http://sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3337&navigator=6

 

[bwana]

I'd get the 50mm straight off the bat. Its fast and nice to have.

The 18-55mm kit lens that comes with the 350D is pretty wide and should do just fine for landscapes. Shoot with it for a few weeks, and see what you need. I've got the 16-35mm f/2.8 L II which is pretty nice but a bit of a pig to lug around.

 

[swift412]

Thank you for the replies

Unfortunately for now, I'm unable to unafford the real wide lenses, so the 28mm will have to do. Stitching shouldn't be a problem as I'm already doing it with a point & shoot on a cheap plastic tripod and without a shutter release.

I'll probably only make the decision once I get the camera and I've used it for a few days, but I'll probably get the 28mm first and then the 50mm at a later stage.

Thank you all for your input

 

[ldmelsa]

I'll probably only make the decision once I get the camera and I've used it for a few days, but I'll probably get the 28mm first and then the 50mm at a later stage.

if you get the kit lens, then that covers those ranges (18-55mm)
problem solved, unless you're into lowlight hand-held stuff

 

[swift412]

I was considering the primes because I heard you'll get a better picture from a prime lens than a zoom lens, isn't that true?

 

[koffiejunkie]

I will hopefully getting a Canon 350D w/ kitlens soon

Congrats and welcome! Get a flickr account!

First on my list is the 50mm f/1.8

50mm is not even close to wide on a 350D - it's short tele, nice for portraits. Nevertheless, it's excellent bang for buck, and if you can spare the cash, do it.

Neither the 50, nor the 28 are very wide on the 350d if you're into landscapes, unless you want to do stitching. Have a look at something like the Sigma 10-20.

+1 I have this lens, and it's worth every penny.

Just a word of caution - that 10-20 is a Sigma DC Lens (which means it is meant for smaller sensors). If you ever intend to upgrade to a full-frame sensor

Please stop that. It's like saying, don't get the optional radio/CD with your new Citi Golf because it won't fit one day when you get a BMW. Someone just buying a 350D now is not likely to get a 5DmkII any time soon. And from what Big-Al tells me, the 10-20 does work on a full frame body, despite the DC branding.

might I recommend the 12-24 Sigma EX DG F4.5-5.6 - really nice lens and minimal distortion too (no weird fish eye barrel distortion) I bet it cost more but if you intend to put money into good glass to keep, it is probably not a bad purchase.

The 10-20 is marginally better in every respect, and has much better CA control. This is important, because you lose a lot more detail to CA on a very wide lens than on a mid-to-tele lens.

I was considering the primes because I heard you'll get a better picture from a prime lens than a zoom lens, isn't that true?

Primes traditionally have less barrel distortion and are sharper, but that's less true now with the higher-end zooms. The above mentioned Sigma 10-20 has hardly any barrel distortion - i.e. you take a picture of something square and it comes out looking square. It's pretty sharp as well - look at my photo stream, in particular this one - there's a 100% crop of the top of one of the buildings in the picture. This picture was taken from RAW and has not been sharpened at all (I didn't know how at the time).

These days the advantage of primes are more limited to their large apertures, small size and light weight relative to zooms in the same range.

 

[bwana]

Please stop that. It's like saying, don't get the optional radio/CD with your new Citi Golf because it won't fit one day when you get a BMW. Someone just buying a 350D now is not likely to get a 5DmkII any time soon.

Why should he stop saying that? There's nothing wrong with buying glass with an eye on the future. Besides - someone buying a inexpensive first dSLR would probably be just as likely to buy a full frame as their next camera - maybe even more likely should the bug bite as they didnt make such a massive initial outlay.

And from what Big-Al tells me, the 10-20 does work on a full frame body, despite the DC branding.

From what I recall all he said was it fits. Apparently the vignetting is quite pronounced.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/discuss/72157601140167638/
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/35875-sigma-10-20-full-frame.html

 

[swift412]

I don't think I'll be getting a full frame camera anytime soon.

I'm definately considering getting a 10-20mm eventually, but it's something I'll have to save up for. In the mean time I was thinking of getting the 28mm to tide me over till then, which is R2500 compared to the R6700+ for the 10-20.

 

[Digilus]

Please stop that. .... Someone just buying a 350D now is not likely to get a 5DmkII any time soon. And from what Big-Al tells me, the 10-20 does work on a full frame body, despite the DC branding.

Nod @koffie .. yeah that thought did cross my mind after I posted - I figure the 12-24 is probably around 1.5 times the price of just the 350D.

I've done lots of nice landscape shots with normal kit lenses. I think swift412 sounds pretty sensible about first trying out the kit stuff and see if there are limitations. I know it took me almost 2 years before I was comfortable enough to know what other lenses I wanted

Enjoy the camera swift .. and ta Bwana for realising the benefit of good glass

 

[swift412]

Thank you everyone

koffiejunkie: I'll make a flickr account and join the myBB group once I've gotten the camera

 

[koffiejunkie]

Why should he stop saying that?

Because almost every single time it comes up (except maybe for the time you were looking for a wide angle), it was clearly irrelevant. Having the eye on the future is one thing, but you were clear from the beginning that you intend to move to a FF body.

For what it's worth, the 10-20mm often sells second-hand on eBay for more than the recommended retail price, let alone the actual retail price. No harm in investing in good glass to use *now*...

 

[bwana]

For what it's worth, the 10-20mm often sells second-hand on eBay for more than the recommended retail price, let alone the actual retail price. No harm in investing in good glass to use *now*...

It doesnt make sense that someone would opt to pay more for a second hand lens when they could pay less for a new one.

I just had a quick look on ebay (US and UK) and the most expensive used 10-20 is going for less than 50% of the MRP/RP. Glass doesnt seem to hold its value all that well.

 

[koffiejunkie]

It doesnt make sense that someone would opt to pay more for a second hand lens when they could pay less for a new one.

That's not my point. My point is it's resellable, often at a good price.

I just had a quick look on ebay (US and UK) and the most expensive used 10-20 is going for less than 50% of the MRP/RP. Glass doesnt seem to hold its value all that well.

They come and go. At a time I was thinking of getting my dad one, and saw a handful going for pretty decent money.

 

[swift412]

Another question, one thing that's being bothering me is how crop ratio applies to EF-S lenses.

I know that a 50mm lens on a camera with a 1.6x crop factor like the 350D is equivalent to a 85mm lens on a full frame camera, but what happens with EF-S lenses that can't fit on full frame cameras?

Is 18mm on an EF-S 18-55 lens on say a 350D, the equivalent of 28mm (18 x 1.6 = 28.8) on a EF 28-80 lens on a full frame camera?

 

[bwana]

Another question, one thing that's being bothering me is how crop ratio applies to EF-S lenses.

I know that a 50mm lens on a camera with a 1.6x crop factor like the 350D is equivalent to a 85mm lens on a full frame camera, but what happens with EF-S lenses that can't fit on full frame cameras?

Is 18mm on an EF-S 18-55 lens on say a 350D, the equivalent of 28mm (18 x 1.6 = 28.8) on a EF 28-80 lens on a full frame camera?

Same rules apply for lenses designed for cropped sensors - the 18-55mm is in reality 28-88mm.

 

[swift412]

Thanks, just wanted to make sure