Inexpensive Canon EF glass?

[seenew]

Really, really new to DLSR photography, and I knew that glass was expensive, but after searching around for macro and wide lenses, I quickly came to the realization that I don't think I can afford any new lenses with school being $35k/yr.

Can someone point me to any good online retailers, brands, or give me any tips at all as to what lenses you recommend? Not just macro or wide, but any. I have really crappy arsenal of an 18-55, a 28-90, and a 75-300. Eck.

--Chris

 

[snap58]

Really, really new to DLSR photography, and I knew that glass was expensive, but after searching around for macro and wide lenses, I quickly came to the realization that I don't think I can afford any new lenses with school being $35k/yr.

Can someone point me to any good online retailers, brands, or give me any tips at all as to what lenses you recommend? Not just macro or wide, but any. I have really crappy arsenal of an 18-55, a 28-90, and a 75-300. Eck.

--Chris

You do an amazing job with your "crappy arsenal". I am sure you will get a lot of help from the forum with this one.

 

[iGary]

Judging from your portfolio, you'd get a kick out of the EF 50 1.8 II.

 

[ipacmm]

I second the EF 50 1.8 II, iGary always recommends it and I knew why once I went out and bought a copy.

 

[mcmadhatter]

Judging from your portfolio, you'd get a kick out of the EF 50 1.8 II.

I bought that lens a few weeks ago, It is amazingly good value, and takes lovely portrait photos

 

[jared_kipe]

I would sell them all off on ebay or Craigslist. I did just that a little while, sold my 28-105mm 18-55mm 28mm f2.8 and 100-300mm USM.

Then you can add the money you make to whatever your budget is and buy some new lenses or something.

I personally think that if you're on a tight budget you shouldn't really be looking for OEM Canon lenses, but something from Tamron or Sigma. But you wanted to know about Canon lenses. I will keep myself from recommending Canon lenses as I'll usually just say that there is a better Sigma alternative for the money, and people are probably sick of that.

Canon makes some good primes though. I like both the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4 primes from canon, I like the USM 1.4 better, but on a budget the 1.8 is a better fit.
Also the 85mm 1.8 is a pretty sweet lens, and it has USM.
I had a 28mm f2.8 canon which was ok, Sigma makes 20mm 24mm and 28mm f1.8 primes.

 

[ChrisA]

Really, really new to DLSR photography, and I knew that glass was expensive, but after searching around for macro and wide lenses, I quickly came to the realization that I don't think I can afford any new lenses with school being $35k/yr.

Can someone point me to any good online retailers, brands, or give me any tips at all as to what lenses you recommend? Not just macro or wide, but any. I have really crappy arsenal of an 18-55, a 28-90, and a 75-300. Eck.

--Chris

I always tell people looking to buy a SLR to shop for lenses _before_ they choose a brand or buy a camera body. As you know it is easy to have a lot more money wrapped up in lenses then in camera bodies.

What I'd do if I were you were look around for used fast primes. These will be goood values and good performers and give you the wide f/stopsyou lack now.

As for macro. Have you tried extension tubes and diopter filters. Not quite as nice as a true macro lens but either the tube ir "filters" will allow you to get closer and in the case of the tube very much closer. The canon brand of diopter is good as is Nikon (achromatic doublets v. simple convex lens)

I have owned a 50mm lens of one type or the other since I bought my first SLR in 1973. They are all good.. and a fast lens like that will allow you to isolate the subject. the other good value is a fast tele like a 135mm f/2.8 or an 85mm f/1.8 You seem to have the focal lenght rang covered and now you may want to move up a bit in "quality" buy that is an expensive jump. Used primes are the way to do that on a budget.

In the Nikon world these primes are available in manual focus for under $100 but I'm sure there are 10 year old EOS primes available for a good value too. I doubt you will find in-expensive fast wide angle lenses these are quite hard to manufacture and therefore expensive

 

[iHotu]

Those lenses are not "bad" and range from 18-300mm. I would keep using them until you can spot a defect in a photo you would like to avoid.

 

[seenew]

Thanks for all the help, guys. I knew this was the place to ask.

So, I get tha Prime means one focal length, right? What does USM stand for, and L-Zoom?

 

[jared_kipe]

USM is Canon's untrasonic focusing mechanisim which is both fast and nearly silent. It also allows for full time manual focus (though maybe not on the 50mm now that I think about it because it uses a micro USM and not the ring type). Sigma and Nikon have the same technology they call it HSM and AF-S respectively.

L lenses are Canon's top of the line designation. All of them cost over $1000 except the 70-200mm f4 and the 17-40mm f4 L lenses. They are good lenses, but are over priced in my opinion, especially for non pro's. But everyone eats them up because they are a status symbol.

 

[seenew]

So the 50mm doesn't have manual focus?

 

[jared_kipe]

So the 50mm doesn't have manual focus?

I was mistaken, you can read why here

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_50_14/index.htm

Obviously all of those lenses have manual focus, via a switch. But the USM has full time manual focus, meaning you don't have do disengage the auto focus switch to be able to manually focus the lens. I find I really like this feature.

 

[form]

It has manual focus, but the rotation is very short and there are no markings or guides to tell you where the proper position should be, or where you're focusing.

 

[jared_kipe]

It has manual focus, but the rotation is very short and there are no markings or guides to tell you where the proper position should be, or where you're focusing.

He's talking about the 1.8, the 1.4 has a distance window.

 

[PBGPowerbook]

All of them cost over $1000 except the 70-200mm f4 and the 17-40mm f4 L lenses.

you forgot the 200/2.8L, great lens

 

[mlrproducts]

First, you have wonderful pictures. A great eye!

Second, go out and buy the 50mm 1.8. Seriously, for the price, its almost a "throw away" lense (meaning the only lens I don't have a filter on, b/c a decent one costs half the price)!

Third, learn from my experience (the hard way). Save up, and buy DECENT glass, be it whatever you deem decent. You are producing good enough pictures that you need not be in a rush. I think you'll be happy buying some L lenses (even the cheaper f4/L) and seeing a huge difference in quality vs. buying some "supposedly better" but cheaper glass and not really seeing results over what you're currently getting.

My $.02

Remember, the lenses are just tools. The better tools you have, the easier it usually makes it on you. However, history has shown us that amazing things can be built with primitive tools (see: egypt).