camera afficionados

christyf5 · #1 07-06-2015, 11:50 PM

I don't belong to a camera forum but I know we have a few camera pros on here so figured I'd post here. I have a canon rebel xt DSLR. Currently I have the kit lens (18-55mm EFS), a canon EF 70-200mm 1:4 L lens and a canon EF 50mm 1:2.5 lens. I have minimal knowledge of lenses and such (I used to be smrt, now not so much) and my next lens purchase was going to be a wide angle (its been so long they stopped selling the one I wanted, 17-40mm L, so I gotta start the research again).

Anyhoo, I just went camping for the weekend where I alternated between the kit lens, which is more versatile for my crazy active kids, and my 50mm when they calmed down a little. I can tell the difference in the photos without even looking and am totally in love with the 50mm and want to junk the kit lens. The photos seem sharper and more vivid with the 50mm! However, the 18-55mm gets used the most so I'm thinking about replacing it with something...sharper and more vivid, lol! Is it worth it? Is there something "better" out there for what I need or is this pretty much it for that range?

Suggestions welcome

Apo Reefer · #2 07-07-2015, 12:11 AM

I just purchased a Canon EF 100mm/f2.8 macro lens (non IS). This lens takes very sharp photos, the details are unbelievable and have a very shallow depth of field (very nice Boke) when used as a portrait lens.

I got it half the price of the IS version. There's also a 60mm version. I love this lens as it covers both worlds, Macro for Aquarium photography and a very nice portrait lens for my kids.

TimT · #3 07-07-2015, 01:55 AM

Hi Christy,

My wife uses a 24-105 F4L lens a lot. It is a good all around range for life shots. Here is more info.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...4L_IS_USM.html

Cheers,
Tim

christyf5 · #4 07-07-2015, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apo Reefer

I just purchased a Canon EF 100mm/f2.8 macro lens (non IS). This lens takes very sharp photos, the details are unbelievable and have a very shallow depth of field (very nice Boke) when used as a portrait lens.

I got it half the price of the IS version. There's also a 60mm version. I love this lens as it covers both worlds, Macro for Aquarium photography and a very nice portrait lens for my kids.

ooh that one is on my list too, where did you get it?

christyf5 · #5 07-07-2015, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimT

Hi Christy,

My wife uses a 24-105 F4L lens a lot. It is a good all around range for life shots. Here is more info.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...4L_IS_USM.html

Cheers,
Tim

Thanks Tim, I'll have a look at the link

sphelps · #6 07-07-2015, 02:56 AM

Prime lenses (no zoom) take better photos in general. An all around lens won't compare but some are definitely better than others. Ones with lower f numbers (bigger aperture) and better glass will for the most part take better photos but cost goes up. Lenses with larger ranges in zoom will also usually sacrifice more in the areas you're concerned with, so for zoom lenses stick with smaller ranges.

For example, replace that 18-55mm with something in the range of 16-35mm which will be a good fit along side the 50mm prime.

kien · #7 07-07-2015, 05:59 AM

If you are sticking with your Rebel XT (or even upgrading to another cropped sensor camera body), then I highly recommend the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens. It's a great step up from the kit lens and is very versatile just like your kit lens in the same range. It's a great little all purpose lens.

It's relatively fast with f2.8 across its entire focal range unlike the canon kit lens that is variable aperture across its range. If you want a bit more bling it happens to come in a Vibration Compensation model (for more money of course). I bought this lens when I had a Rebel a few years ago and still use it with my Canon 40D. I recommend it to all of my friends who also love this lens. I love this lens so much I bought it's larger brother, the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 that's meant for full frame camera bodies like my 6D

kien · #8 07-07-2015, 06:01 AM

For the record, I also have the Canon 24-105L lens which I use on occassion but usually end up using my Tamron 28-75 (on full frame) and Tamron 17-50 (on cropped frame) more than my Canon lens. The Tamron lenses are MUCH lighter and easier to lug around (yes I'm a wimp, deal with it).

christyf5 · #9 07-08-2015, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sphelps

Prime lenses (no zoom) take better photos in general. An all around lens won't compare but some are definitely better than others. Ones with lower f numbers (bigger aperture) and better glass will for the most part take better photos but cost goes up. Lenses with larger ranges in zoom will also usually sacrifice more in the areas you're concerned with, so for zoom lenses stick with smaller ranges.

For example, replace that 18-55mm with something in the range of 16-35mm which will be a good fit along side the 50mm prime.

yeah thats something like the 17-40 which I was looking at a number of years ago, just couldn't do it then, wish I had in hindsight though

christyf5 · #10 07-08-2015, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kien

For the record, I also have the Canon 24-105L lens which I use on occassion but usually end up using my Tamron 28-75 (on full frame) and Tamron 17-50 (on cropped frame) more than my Canon lens. The Tamron lenses are MUCH lighter and easier to lug around (yes I'm a wimp, deal with it).

good to know. yeah I'm already lugging all my lenses around and then a 2 year old on top of that (interestingly enough my camera bag makes a great seat for a 2 year old, its a cross shoulder sling bag). Gets a bit much sometimes. I've never been able to find a point and shoot that I'm happy with though