User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: After a Canon Lens recommendation

  1. #1
    Member 1ponders's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Jun 2010
    Location
    Sunshine Coast
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    After a Canon Lens recommendation

    I have been recommended a number of medium range zoom lenses to replace the standard dismal canon 28-90.
    The ones that grabbed my eye in my price range are the Canon 28-135 and the Sigma 18-125. Outside the price range but highly recommended is the 24-105. For General grab and go is it worth the extra . The current camera it will be used on is an old 300D, but there could be an upgrade in the wind in the near future.

  2. #2
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,130
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    What are you intending to use the lens for? That will help us guide your decision
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter
    1ponders's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Jun 2010
    Location
    Sunshine Coast
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Rick.

    It will simply be for a grab and go lens. A lens that i can take with me when out walking for general purpose use.

  4. #4
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,130
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    ok, whilst the 24-105 is a superb lens, you will do well with either the siggy or the canon as a walk around lens. It is just a matter of what you want to pay. But long term the 24-105 is a damn fine lens from all reports and it may be worth considering saving up a bit longer and getting that.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Lower Hunter Valley
    Posts
    255
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    G'day 1

    Get a prime lens. Primes are sharper, more versatile, easier to handle and much better optically than any zoom. My most used lens is a 24mm/2.8 on a DSLR, 35mm/2.8 on SLR.

    Learn to frame and compose by moving yourself.
    Ray

  6. #6
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    26 Nov 2008
    Location
    Booval, Qld (near Ipswich)
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ray, I'm interested in your statement that a prime is much more versatile than a zoom, how did you get to that conclusion?
    Also I tend to disagree that primes are better than zooms. With today's pro zooms I wouldnt hesitate to use just a 70-200 instead of carrying the 85 and 200 primes. I'm assuming your statement was pitting a pro prime against a pro zoom? Cause a pro zoom outperforms a stanard prime any day of the week.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Serial Truant.... phild's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Jun 2008
    Location
    Launceston
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Welcome to AP Paul, how are things up there at the ponderosa??
    Phil

  8. #8
    Ausphotography Regular Brian500au's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 May 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,057
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi and welcome to AP.

    I have used both the 24-105 and the 28-135 and both are excellent lens. My first lens was the 28-135 on an older 10D and some of the shots I took with that lens are still my favourites today. I sold it and decided to buy the 24-105L, but in reality if you are on a budget then I would be as happy with the 28-135 again. The other thing about this 28-135 is it holds it's value on the second hand market well - so if you do decide to upgrade in the future, there is a decent second hand market available to sell the lens.

    Both lens are full frame lenses - ie they will fit the full range of Canon DSLRs, so you are not restricted if you chose to upgrade your canon body in the future.
    www.kjbphotography.com.au

    1Dx, 5DsR, 200-400 f4L Ext, 100-400 f4.5-5.6L II, 70-300 f4-5.6L IS, 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 24-70 f2.8L II, 16-35 f4 IS, 11-24 f4L, 85 f1.2L II, 500 f4L IS, 300 f2.8 IS, ∑50 f1.4 A


  9. #9
    New Member Phil Mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Dec 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    22
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have the 24-105 on a 500D and have taken some great shots with it. An advantage is that it is sealed against dust etc, so it should keep well for future body upgrades. * Edited: members with under 30 days membership and 50 posts are not allowed to promote commercial sites on Ausphotography : Admin *.

    Cheers
    Last edited by ricktas; 30-06-2010 at 11:55am.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    13 Dec 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,051
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Heath View Post

    Get a prime lens. Primes are sharper, more versatile, easier to handle and much better optically than any zoom.
    Quote Originally Posted by Allann View Post
    Ray, I'm interested in your statement that a prime is much more versatile than a zoom, how did you get to that conclusion?

    mmmm ... me too actually. If the OP is after a "grab and go" lens, for walkabout photography, that will serve him well in most situations, I dont really see how a fixed lens could be more versatile either. I reckon the 24-105 would be the go if you can stretch the budget. Even though the FOV wont be all that wide on your 300D, by all reports (I dont use Canon) it is a fantastic lens. It will be an even better investment for the future if you upgrade your camera to a full frame version down the track.

    I suppose it comes down to do you want a "grab and go" and shoot wider type landscape shots, or do you wanna "grab and go" and shoot general/street/walkabout/portrait/everydayshooteverything/ kinda shots ?? The 24-105 is perfect for pretty much all of the latter category, but will it be wide enough for the former ??
    Hi Im Darren

    www.darrengrayphotography.com

    SONY A850 (FF)] + GRIP | SONY A350 (APS-C) + GRIP | SONY NEX-5 +16 2.8 + 18-55 E-MOUNT LENSES | CZ 85 1.4 | 50 1.4 | 28-75 2.8 | 70-200 2.8 | 2 x 42AMs | 24" imac | LR | CS4 | + loads of other junk


  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Lower Hunter Valley
    Posts
    255
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdazzler View Post
    mmmm ... me too actually. If the OP is after a "grab and go" lens, for walkabout photography, that will serve him well in most situations, I dont really see how a fixed lens could be more versatile either. I reckon the 24-105 would be the go if you can stretch the budget. Even though the FOV wont be all that wide on your 300D, by all reports (I dont use Canon) it is a fantastic lens. It will be an even better investment for the future if you upgrade your camera to a full frame version down the track.

    I suppose it comes down to do you want a "grab and go" and shoot wider type landscape shots, or do you wanna "grab and go" and shoot general/street/walkabout/portrait/everydayshooteverything/ kinda shots ?? The 24-105 is perfect for pretty much all of the latter category, but will it be wide enough for the former ??
    G'day all

    Well, primes are more versatile for several reasons:
    they have larger maximum apertures so are more hand holdable in lower light as the shutter speed can be kept up;

    they are physically smaller so are easier to hand hold;

    they are more versatile because they make you consider angle of view and perspective not just subject size;

    they are generally sharper and optically better because they are of a simpler design.

    I'm somewhat bewildered by these oft quoted concepts of "grab and go" lenses and "walkabout photography". Should I infer that sometimes people just want to mindlessly "grab" images and "walkabout" to something else. It should be that all photography is important; along with a realisation that as a photographer you cannot always be "armed" with the "correct" gear to photograph any subject to the nth degree.

    My most often used lens, the lens that I "walkabout" with, is a 24mm on DSLR because that matches the way I've come to view my world after nearly 30 years of 35mm film photography using mostly a 35mm lens. i.e I see the world just a little wider than "normal".

    So if I'm out with my 24mm and I suddenly have the urge to make an image that requires a 200mm, well I just can't. I'd have to do something creative or come back another day.
    Last edited by Ray Heath; 30-06-2010 at 2:10pm. Reason: if can't replace of

  12. #12
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,130
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Back to what the OP asked for...

    They wanted a ZOOM, that could be used as their general work around lens. They also noted that the cost of the 24-105 was prohibitive to them at this time. So, considering the information they provided, a set of primes is going to costs them way more than their single general purpose zoom.

    I think sometimes those of us with years of experience and much more camera gear can forget that those newer to photography do not have the money or need to spend a heap of it on gear at this time in their photography.

    Keep this thread on track and answer the questions the OP asked, rather than taking it off on a tangent..thanks!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    06 Jan 2009
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Get the 24-105 if you can, it's a fantastic lens. I have no experience with the other - I originally bought the 24-105 to replace the kit lens on my 300D and never looked back. My only wish is that it was f/2.8, but -hey- you can't have everything (and it has IS anyway, which mostly makes up for it).
    Canon 5DmkII + stuff

  14. #14
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    26 Nov 2008
    Location
    Booval, Qld (near Ipswich)
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The newer 18-55 IS that comes as a kit lens on many cameras these days is plentiful on eBay as people upgrade to pro glass, thar could be an option. Not too big, better iq than original 18-55 nonIS version, and cheap. The 55-250 is in a similar league and has more reach.
    Sorry Rick for helping drag it off topic, I should know better.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    30 Jun 2010
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sigma 24-70 as a grab N go * Link removed. Members with under 30 days membership and 50 posts cannot promote commercial sites on Ausphotography - Admin *
    For serious work a Canon L or a canon prime.
    David
    Last edited by ricktas; 30-06-2010 at 5:03pm.
    Canon 5D user
    My Photos http://sunseeker.redbubble.com/
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  16. #16
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    08 May 2009
    Location
    Buninyong
    Posts
    1,235
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am one who has had the 18-55 and 55-250 kit lenses and moved onto the 24-105 as my main "walkaround" lens. I found the IQ quite fine in both of the kit lenses and would recommend them to anyone on a tight budget. The problem I did have though is that the 18-55 lacked a bit of reach, it is amazing how often you want to go from 30mm to say 80mm.

    I really love the 24-105, it is wide enough for most things, and has enough reach when I need it. For dramatic wide, I also got the 10-22. Have a look at what you shoot a lot of though, you might find that 28mm on the wide end isn't wide enough for you and would just frustrate you. Every mm counts down at that end, there is a big different between say 18mm and 28mm!

    There are a few options for you now and you have identified a couple allready; Canon do a few reasonable priced lenses like the EF-S 17-85 or the EF-S 18-135 (neither of which I have used). They do hold value reasonably so buying something like these and upgrading to a 24-105 down the track is certainly an option. Personally I think if budget is a significant factor, go with the cheaper lens at this point of your development.

    Rememer too, if you are considering going to a full frame camera like the 1D or 5D, you should look for EF lenses, as these cameras won't accept the EF-S mount.

    Edit to add: This site: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ is a great resource in terms of lens reviews for eveything in the Canon lineup and a few of the Sigmas and Tamrons. There are also some tips and general lens information that is worth a read too.
    Last edited by etherial; 30-06-2010 at 5:07pm.
    Mic

    Photography is the art of telling stories with light.

    www.michaelgoulding.com

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    31 Jan 2010
    Location
    North East
    Posts
    312
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by 1ponders View Post
    Outside the price range but highly recommended is the 24-105. For General grab and go is it worth the extra .
    I've owned both and still have my 24-105, which I think offers outstanding image quality on a crop camera. The 28-135 was not by any means a bad lens though and the only reasons I sold it were firstly that I wanted to offer the camera I was selling with a lens and it was the best choice from what I had, and that the 24-105 has a reputation as an outstanding lens and I wanted to find out how good things could be with pro glass. I wasn't disappointed: contrast, colour, sharpness, build quality - all superior.

    As to whether it is worth it, the L lens is over twice the price, is nowhere near twice as good, but is a lovely bit of kit. L lenses hold their value very well but they tend to cost much more, so you can still lose a significant amount when you sell. On the other hand, you are much less likely to sell the 24-105 to upgrade to something else, whereas if you continue your interest in photography you will almost certainly upgrade from either of the other lenses you mention. You will save money buying the L now if that's the case.

  18. #18
    Member TassieSnapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Sep 2006
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    94
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Get the 24-105. Brilliant lens. You wont regret it.
    Canon 5d MkII
    EF 24-105 f4L IS USM
    EF 100 f2.8 Macro USM
    EF 17-40 f4L USM
    EF 50 f1.8
    Canon 580ex II

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    19 Mar 2009
    Location
    Hamilton Brisbane
    Posts
    71
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    +1 for the canon 24-105mm i own one and used to use it on my 450d before upgrading to a 5dmk2 it is a very good lens and worth the money
    |Gear|Canon 5D MkII + Grip |Canon 7D + Grip |Canon 580EXII x 3|Canon EF Fisheye 15mm F/2.8 |Canon EF 16-35mm F/2.8L Mk II | |Canon EF 400mm F/5.6L |Canon EF 70-200mm F/2.8L IS |Canon EF 24-105mm F/4 L IS |Canon EF 100mm F/2.8 Macro |Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 MK II |Sekonic L-358 Lightmeter |Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod + 322RC2 Head |Manfrotto 628B Monopod | Wireless Remote Flash Trigger PT-04 CN & 5 Receivers| Plus Too Much More (Filters Ect)
    Chris | http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=119829358036800 | http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisprendergast |

  20. #20
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    08 May 2009
    Location
    Buninyong
    Posts
    1,235
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    People, please remember the OP's budget. It is very easy for us all to sit back and say buy the 24-105, and I'm sure if people had the money they would but they are $1200!

    Quote Originally Posted by 1ponders View Post
    The ones that grabbed my eye in my price range are the Canon 28-135 and the Sigma 18-125. Outside the price range but highly recommended is the 24-105.
    The two lenses the OP has mentioned are $599 and $425, which are a completely different price point to the 24-105 which is outside his price range.

    Unfortunately not everyone has money to burn on top quality glass.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •