holiday advice

[mcmadhatter]

I am going on a trip of a lifetime round asia and oceania soon, so natrually I am taking my Eos 350D, I also have £150 knocking around which i have contemplated on buying a lense with. Trouble is I can't decide between a 50mm prime lense or a macro zoom lense around the 50 - 100 mm mark.

I already have a 100-300 and the not particuarly amazing 18-55mm that came with the camera.

Mainly I shall be takign outdoor shots of landscapes etc, but like the idea of a prime lense that can go down to F1.8.

Any suggestions for lense choice, or equally well guides/tips/pointers for landscape photography.

 

[Abstract]

I'm not sure whether you'll need a macro lense or not. I know prime lenses sound great, but for vacation photos, a zoom lense really gives you the flexibility to shoot all sorts of things, and to me that sounds more valuable than a prime even if it opens to f/1.8.

Also, I don't think you'll be using your 100-300 mm, but it depends on what you'll be going there to see. In fact, you'll probably be using your 18-55 mm most often and never really need to go beyond 55 mm. I'd suggest a lens that's wider than 18 mm, but these lenses cost more than 150 quid.

I guess I'd either get nothing and spend the money while on vacation, or just get the 50 mm f/1.8. It might come in useful if you're willing to switch lenses during tours and stuff. A lot of tourist destinations aren't too fond of tourists using flash in spiritual buildings, and sometimes the insides of these buildings are poorly lit, so a lens that can go to f/1.8 may come in very useful. Either way, a 50 mm f/1.8 is good to have in your line-up anyway, so there's no loss even if you don't use it on vacation.

 

[law guy]

I've done a conversion of your budget to USD from GBP to help things on my side - 150 pounds equals around 286.36 US dollars.

Given that - you're very close to the price of the more robust 1.4 50mm from Canon at least at US prices: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...140&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

I note that you mention landscapes. On your 1.6x crop 350D, a 24mm may be more useful ($289) - http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...091&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

I think folks prefer the 20mm http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...082&is=USA&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
which would be a great 32 mm equivilent FOV on the 350D, but it is around $100 more expensive.

In that $400 area (211 GBP) is the 2.8 Sigma 24-70 zoom which is generally well spoken of over on the http://www.photography-on-the.net Canon lens forum. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...f=pd_bbs_1/102-8641610-0444969?_encoding=UTF8
This is the type of zoom range that I'd go with as a walk-around because I'd like it to at least go as wide as 24 (and assuming this would take the place of the 18-55 kit lens) The constant 2.8 across the entire zoom range is also nice for lower light. I haven't used this lens, but I believe there is an active forum on this over at potn - here it is: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=171128

Good luck and have a great trip!

 

[jared_kipe]

I've done a conversion of your budget to USD from GBP to help things on my side - 150 pounds equals around 286.36 US dollars.


In that $400 area (211 GBP) is the 2.8 Sigma 24-70 zoom which is generally well spoken of over on the http://www.photography-on-the.net Canon lens forum. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...f=pd_bbs_1/102-8641610-0444969?_encoding=UTF8
This is the type of zoom range that I'd go with as a walk-around because I'd like it to at least go as wide as 24 (and assuming this would take the place of the 18-55 kit lens) The constant 2.8 across the entire zoom range is also nice for lower light. I haven't used this lens, but I believe there is an active forum on this over at potn - here it is: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=171128

Good luck and have a great trip!

Zoom. People are so enamored with prime lenses because they think they make them better photographers. Meh. Primes are fine for true Macro work though.

I own the 24-70 Sigma EX lens, its a great lens, and will be way better than your kit lens. You could also consider the NEW Sigma 17-70mm which is a very nice lens from what I've seen. Also the Sigma 18-125mm is probably worth a look for being a great walk around range and a step up from the kit lens. Big step

My site http://www.sailbyair.com/
Another great review site http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html
http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/lenstests

 

[cgratti]

Macro lenses are primarily designed for, well.... macro.... You will get much better results for sight seeing with a prime lens.

A good walk around lens is the Canon 28-135 IS. This lens costs about $400US. The 50mm 1.8 is a great lens for the money also.

 

[Abstract]

Haha, I knew people would start going over the £150 budget.

Lenses in other parts of the world aren't as cheap as they are in the US, so a lens that costs $150 in the US probably costs around $200 and up in the UK. The only lens that may be useful for him in that range is the 50 mm because he can use it in low light. It's too long at 50 mm, but it might be useful. I think not buying anything is a good idea, but if you something that might prove useful, the 50 mm f/1.8 is it.

The Canon 50 mm f/1.8 isn't really a macro lense anyway, is it.

 

[virividox]

id get the prime 50 - just because its a great lens for low light, and can be used for portraiture, its light and small, optically its a dream, and its within your budget

 

[cookie1105]

Haha, I knew people would start going over the £150 budget.

I'm under

ef 50mm f/1.8 The Mk I not the Mk II. Here is what I believe to be a beautiful example on ebay.co.uk It should go for £85-120. Then spend the rest on 1GB memory and a battery, and you're laughing
Same optical quality, better build quality than the Mk I.
I have just won an ef 50mm f/1.4 USM on there. Now I just have to pay for it

 

[jared_kipe]

The Sigma 18-125mm is within your budget.

 

[virividox]

i say stick with canon lenses. dont go 3rd party. canon may cost slightly more, but overall they have better quality and retain their value better

 

[mcmadhatter]

Then spend the rest on 1GB memory and a battery, and you're laughing
Same optical quality, better build quality than the Mk I.
I have just won an ef 50mm f/1.4 USM on there. Now I just have to pay for it

I have several 1 gig cards, and a ipod camera connector so space isn't a problem, and I have an extra battery so that is cool too.


I'd love to buy some decent £300-400 lenses, but I'm a student

The sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 HF (62mm) is as bad as my original canon lens, and all other sigma zooms have similar apertures or are too expensive, I could try picking up a second hand one on ebay.

 

[virividox]

I have several 1 gig cards, and a ipod camera connector so space isn't a problem, and I have an extra battery so that is cool too.


I'd love to buy some decent £300-400 lenses, but I'm a student

The sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 HF (62mm) is as bad as my original canon lens, and all other sigma zooms have similar apertures or are too expensive, I could try picking up a second hand one on ebay.

im a student too. and i decided that its best to have lens lenses that are high quality than more lenses that will lose their value.

 

[jared_kipe]

I have several 1 gig cards, and a ipod camera connector so space isn't a problem, and I have an extra battery so that is cool too.


I'd love to buy some decent £300-400 lenses, but I'm a student

The sigma 24-70mm F3.5-5.6 HF (62mm) is as bad as my original canon lens, and all other sigma zooms have similar apertures or are too expensive, I could try picking up a second hand one on ebay.

I don't think anyone would recommend THAT 24-70mm. While the 18-125mm has similar apertures to the kit lens, it is much improved especially wide open.

im a student to. and i decided that its best to have lens lenses that are high quality than more lenses that will lose theri value.

I'm a student too. And I decided that its best to have lenses that are high quality. So I choose to go with Sigma. I shoot all sigma lenses now and if I had to replace my lenses with similar Canon lenses I would have to spend a lot more.

Sigma 24-70mm EX $365
Sigma 150mm EX Macro $545
Sigma 10-20mm EX $450
=$1360

Canon 24-70mm L $1150
Canon 180mm L Macro $1260
Canon 10-22mm EFS $690
=$3100

Missing features on the Sigma lenses? Well the 24-70 isn't HSM (USM), but it can focus closer making it more useful in the field.

Missing features of the Canon lenses? The Sigma macro lens is almost one stop faster (f2.8 vs f3.5).

All my sigma lenses came with a lens hood, and a soft case. These are extras in Canon land.

 

[virividox]

I don't think anyone would recommend THAT 24-70mm. While the 18-125mm has similar apertures to the kit lens, it is much improved especially wide open.


I'm a student too. And I decided that its best to have lenses that are high quality. So I choose to go with Sigma. I shoot all sigma lenses now and if I had to replace my lenses with similar Canon lenses I would have to spend a lot more.

Sigma 24-70mm EX $365
Sigma 150mm EX Macro $545
Sigma 10-20mm EX $450
=$1360

Canon 24-70mm L $1150
Canon 180mm L Macro $1260
Canon 10-22mm EFS $690
=$3100

Missing features on the Sigma lenses? Well the 24-70 isn't HSM (USM), but it can focus closer making it more useful in the field.

Missing features of the Canon lenses? The Sigma macro lens is almost one stop faster (f2.8 vs f3.5).

All my sigma lenses came with a lens hood, and a soft case. These are extras in Canon land.

while this brand may work for you and your budget. i am recommending, that he start a collection of canon lenses to be used with many future bodies to come. obviously you have made your choice to go with sigma, and by all means that's fine. but since hes starting witha clean slate, he might as well go for the best.

 

[mcmadhatter]

while this brand may work for you and your budget. i am recommending, that he start a collection of canon lenses to be used with many future bodies to come. obviously you have made your choice to go with sigma, and by all means that's fine. but since hes starting witha clean slate, he might as well go for the best.

Unfortunately I am heavily constrained by cost, so I don't want to pay more (almost twice of much) for a lens of similar quality. So whilst I would love L series Lenses across the board, sigma zoom lenses are a more practical alternative, especially as the budget lenses are of comparable or better quality to a canon lense for the same price. I would love to be able to spend £300 on a lens, but given a choice I would rather have a cheaper lens so that I can take pictures now, and then upgrade in 3 years time to L series Lenses after graduation, than have no lenses at all.

(the exception in all this is the Canon F1.8 50mm prime lens, which seems to be a bit of a bargain for the money, especially as I have no external flash gun and no low light suitable lenses)

 

[Gee]

Personally, I'd recommend you stick with the lens you already have and get yourself a small compact camera.

Trust me, if you're gonna be bumming around the world on a budget, staying in hostels and such, the SLR is something you'll want to keep hidden in your bag and bring out when you're doing the tourist/sightseeing thing.

But when you're out on the lash in Sydney, hanging on a beach in Malaysia, eating out on the Khao San Road, or bungie jumping in Queenstown, you'll want something small and practical to carry round.

My two pence worth...

 

[virividox]

i dont understand that kind of mentality. why invest in a great camera just to leave it at home? thats why there's insurance in case it gets stolen or u break it. if your making a far away journey bring the best camera you can, and record those memories.

small cameras are for parties or when you can be bothered to take your full kit. but when you are traveling you don't know what focal lengths you will need, and a ps will be serverly limiting

 

[Gee]

I didn't say leave the SLR at home. I said he should also buy and take a point-and-shoot for the times when he doesn't want to use the SLR - like evenings out in bars and such.

 

[ChrisA]

I am going on a trip of a lifetime round asia and oceania soon, so natrually I am taking my Eos 350D, I also have £150 knocking around which i have contemplated on buying a lense with..

Get the widest llens you can find that can open up to at least f/1.8. I don't know the Canon line. I know they make a 50mm f/1.8 but see if you can't get a 35mm f/1.8 On the digital camera with it's "crop factor" the 50mm lens is a mild telephoto. The 300mm lens seems a bit long What would you use it for? Wildlife? Are you bringing a tripod? You'd need one for a 300mm lens.

 

[ChrisA]

i dont understand that kind of mentality. why invest in a great camera just to leave it at home?

The suggestion was not to leave the SLR at home. It was to bring a second smaller camera in addition to the SLR. I kind of agree. Given the limited budget he's not going to be able to buy the that f/2.8 zoom that really would be the best lens. I'd think a 35mm f/1.4 would be good. But a Pelican case and a small P&S might be good too.

One neat thing you can do with many P&S camera is buy a waterpoof case. Even if you would never go diving under water with the P&S, that case allows you t take it places you wouldn't normally be able to take a camera

The P&S may not be as good as the SLR but if allows you to take pictures you'd otherwise miss it's worth it.

 

[Abstract]

i dont understand that kind of mentality. why invest in a great camera just to leave it at home? thats why there's insurance in case it gets stolen or u break it.

small cameras are for parties or when you can be bothered to take your full kit.

Haven't backpacked much, have you.

An SLR in it's own camera bag is annoying to have around, and quite frankly, not practical socially. If he meets people on his trip, is he going to whip out an dSLR every time he's at a bar? No way. And if he's sharing a room with 5 people he hardly knows, and they all know he carries expensive gear with him, guess who's personal belongings stand out a little bit more for thieves within the group? Imagine bringing a DSLR and getting it stolen. The photos on the CF or SD card are lost as well, you know. Insurance won't get those back.

Either bring both a DSLR and a small point-and-shoot, or only bring the point-and-shoot. I'd never recommend anyone bring just a DSLR on the kind of trip he's taking. Maybe when he's older and staying at hotels and stuff, then he could bring that SLR around.

 

[mcmadhatter]

Get the widest llens you can find that can open up to at least f/1.8. I don't know the Canon line. I know they make a 50mm f/1.8 but see if you can't get a 35mm f/1.8 On the digital camera with it's "crop factor" the 50mm lens is a mild telephoto. The 300mm lens seems a bit long What would you use it for? Wildlife? Are you bringing a tripod? You'd need one for a 300mm lens.

To be honest i was probably gonna leave the 100 300 at home as it ways a ton and i usually only use it for sports photography, on the point and shoot note,My girlfriend taking a sony cybershot (about 6 megapixels), with 2Gb of MemSticks so that (as many have pointed out) will be great for "bar work", and I shall be borrowing a friends sealife sports for reef diving

 

[Gee]

So, what type of trip is this, and what type of traveller are you? Is it a gap year thing, or time out from a job? How long you going for?

 

[law guy]

Haven't backpacked much, have you.

An SLR in it's own camera bag is annoying to have around, and quite frankly, not practical socially. If he meets people on his trip, is he going to whip out an dSLR every time he's at a bar? No way. And if he's sharing a room with 5 people he hardly knows, and they all know he carries expensive gear with him, guess who's personal belongings stand out a little bit more for thieves within the group? Imagine bringing a DSLR and getting it stolen. The photos on the CF or SD card are lost as well, you know. Insurance won't get those back.

Either bring both a DSLR and a small point-and-shoot, or only bring the point-and-shoot. I'd never recommend anyone bring just a DSLR on the kind of trip he's taking. Maybe when he's older and staying at hotels and stuff, then he could bring that SLR around.

Good poing re a good P&S. I have so many great images captured with my 4mp Digital Elph (the CF S400). Aside from being a great little p&s (great colors and expsure), it was (need to replace with a new one) always with me - pocket size and had a 35-105mm zoom. I also took to capturing more movie clips with this than my Sony DV cam for the same more likely to have it with me reason.

Back to earlier comments - My recommendation for further investigation on the zoom side was for the f2.8 24-70 based on the comments on I saw on POTN. I hear what you're saying that it still may be too expensive. I've found it for $364 (193 GBP) at sigma4less.com: http://www.sigma4less.com/sess/utn;...8+EX+DG+Macro+for+Canon+AF+=28SG2470F28MCA=29

 

[mcmadhatter]

So, what type of trip is this, and what type of traveller are you? Is it a gap year thing, or time out from a job? How long you going for?

Just finished uni, and I am at a loose end until I start my Job in september, so me and the misses are going to Hk Singapore, malaysia Oz and NZ for 6 weeks, staying in a mixture of youth hostels, friends houses and tents. Thanks for all the advice on lenses, I am going to try and get a 2nd hand sigma zoom 24-70 or around that for my £150 budget, failing that then a f1.8 50mm prime from canon (and just use my legs as the zoom where possible).

I'll put the photos up online when I get back in August