Message from discussion
Second/additional lenses (and general advice) for digital rebel
Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews2.google.com!not-for-mail
From: misterw...@gmail.com (Peter Wang)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.equipment
Subject: Second/additional lenses (and general advice) for digital rebel
Date: 10 Aug 2004 06:56:22 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <24db3d1e.0408100556.69b7eb04@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.243.206.237
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1092146182 22405 127.0.0.1 (10 Aug 2004 13:56:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 13:56:22 +0000 (UTC)
Hi everyone,
I'm getting a digital rebel 300D and I'm shopping around for a second
lens. I've done some light 35mm SLR work in the past, and mostly have
been working on improving my framing and composition with a digital
Elph S230 over the past few years
(http://www.electrictao.net/gallery/portfolio). I like landscape,
scenery, architecture, astro and people photos. I don't generally do
any sports photos, though my fiance is an equestrian so I guess I'd
better start learning how to clean horse muck off my camera. I also
like taking macro shots of flowers and insects, but I feel these tend
to be less challenging tests of composition.
I'm really excited about exploring photography more with the DR, but I
suspect that the kit 18-55 isn't quite what I'm looking for. Though
I like the idea of an 18mm wide-angle, I'm worried about distortion
and sharpness at the 18mm end. Also, I'd like to have more of a
25-125 zoom for walking around. I initially was looking for more of a
70-200/300 telephoto, but I figure I'm only going to use that much
telephoto for a small percentage of shots (i.e. wildlife shots), and
having a more compact, optically sound lens with smaller range was a
better option.
I know that I will get a Canon 50mm (1.8 or 1.4) and possibly a 20mm
wide-angle prime at some point down the road. I'm also probably going
to get a mid-range telephoto zoom at some point (100-300mm), or I'll
just rent a 400mm prime from the local camera place for weekend
wildlife trips. So the big question is, what to get as my second
(first non-kit) lens? Here's what I've been looking at:
1. Canon EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5; Pros: great reviews, great price, USM;
Cons: less zoom, no macro
2. Tamron SP 24-135 f/3.5-5.6; Pros: more range, sharp at 24mm, macro;
Cons: more $$, not so great above 90mm
3. Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6; Pros: big lens with lots of range, less $$,
macro; Cons: would still have to swap lens for 35-50mm range shots, is
image contrast and sharpness sacrificed for the zoom range?
4. Tamron XR 28-300 f/3.5-6.3; Pros: less $$, all-in-one lens, macro;
Cons: image quality at long focal lengths, and is such a wide range
really that useful/valuable? (I got an SLR for a reason, after all)
One thing I've noticed is that a lot of Canon's zoom lenses don't seem
to offer macro capability. Is there a reason for this? Any tips on
getting around this limitation (e.g. dedicated macro lens, etc.)?
Also, any advice on how well/how poorly macro multifilter sets work
would be appreciated.
I have a Meade ETX-90 telescope for casual observing, and it doubles
as a 1250mm f/13.8 spotting scope, but I have no idea how well this
works on terrestrial targets and with a dSLR.
Thanks for reading my long post and TIA for any help,
Peter
|
