If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
"SteveB" wrote in message
I have decided on the Canon 50D, and am very close to purchase. If I had to buy one lens that would cover a lot of things, or be a first lens, which one would that be? What would be a good two lens package? What would be a good second lens if only one comes with the camera? What's your budget? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
"SteveB" wrote in message ... I have decided on the Canon 50D, and am very close to purchase. If I had to buy one lens that would cover a lot of things, or be a first lens, which one would that be? What would be a good two lens package? What would be a good second lens if only one comes with the camera? I have a 50D - it needs good lenses to make the most of the resolution of the sensor. The two I use most are the 70-200mm f4L IS and the 24-105 L IS. The 70-200 is very sharp. A set of extension tubes will enable you to do macro work. I use a Canon flash gun - both the 580 EX and the 430 EX will do a good job (both are now mark II versions). John |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
"SteveB" wrote in message ... I have decided on the Canon 50D, and am very close to purchase. If I had to buy one lens that would cover a lot of things, or be a first lens, which one would that be? What would be a good two lens package? What would be a good second lens if only one comes with the camera? I forgot to address the low light part of your question. I have a 50mm f1.4 that takes sharp photos once it's stopped down to f1.8. Use the fine tuning facility of the autofocus (of the 50D) to get the best from this lens. John |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
SteveB wrote:
I have decided on the Canon 50D, and am very close to purchase. If I had to buy one lens that would cover a lot of things, or be a first lens, which one would that be? What would be a good two lens package? What would be a good second lens if only one comes with the camera? [] I appreciate any help, and enjoy the newsgroup a lot, although most of it is over my head. But I still manage to have a lot of fun with my cameras. Steve Steve, Although I would buy Nikon rather than Canon, a good general lens is the 18 - 200mm Image Stabilised lens, and avoids the need to change lenses. but it is quite expensive. http://www.amazon.co.uk/18-200-Lens-...07660&sr =8-1 For general use, the "kit" 18 - 55mm will probably do you nicely, although it doesn't have the telephoto reach of the 18 - 200mm. If you have the 18-55, a second lens might be the 55-200mm IS. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-18-55-...07698&sr =1-2 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-55-250...5JGMP4MJGH59WA These are "general-purpose" rather than specialist lenses. You can get a wide choice, and they will empty your wallet very easily! If you are going to pay quite a lot of money, to my thinking you get the most use out of the 18-200mm, but with its relatively small maximum aperture at the telephoto end, you can use the teleconvertors. You should check if its macro capability is good enough for you. Cheers, David |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
I have decided on the Canon 50D, and am very close to purchase.
If I had to buy one lens that would cover a lot of things, or be a first lens, which one would that be? What would be a good two lens package? What would be a good second lens if only one comes with the camera? I take a lot of "general" pictures, that is scenery, travel, and grandkids. I like to do macro on flowers and 1-3 feet on hummingbirds. I also do macros less than one foot on specialized fabrication to share with associated newsgroups. I also like some telephoto capability for large birds. I like to experiment with low light situations like sunsets, firesides, twilight, and forest shade. Are the 2x adapters a reasonable way to go to get a longer lens without the cost? As for flashes, long long ago when I had a b&w darkroom, I had a bounce flash with clip on filters that were useful for many situations. Are these still the way to go, or do the current electronic ones have that flexibility? I notice that most high end cameras today have hot shoes, so I am ass-u-ming that additional flashes are used. I have taken pictures now for fifty years, but do not have the experience in the technical aspects of a lot of you who are younger . This is a big deal money outlay for me, and I would like to be satisfied with it, and not run into the disappointment of buying something and then having to buy another. I think this camera will fill my needs and I won't outgrow it in my lifetime. Thanks. I'm getting old, and don't have the brainpower (a TBI four years ago) to research, process, and retain all of this, so I ask here for help to shortcut the process. I appreciate any help, and enjoy the newsgroup a lot, although most of it is over my head. But I still manage to have a lot of fun with my cameras. Steve |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
David J Taylor wrote:
[] If you are going to pay quite a lot of money, to my thinking you get the most use out of the 18-200mm, but with its relatively small maximum aperture at the telephoto end, you can use the teleconvertors. You should check if its macro capability is good enough for you. Cheers, David Thats: ... relatively small maximum aperture at the telephoto end, you can't use the teleconvertors. David |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
"David J Taylor"
wrote in [...] For general use, the "kit" 18 - 55mm will probably do you nicely, although it doesn't have the telephoto reach of the 18 - 200mm. The 18-55 should be avoided like the plague. The 18-55 IS costs little more and is distinctly superior (although obviously not in L series territory). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
DRS wrote:
"David J Taylor" wrote in [...] For general use, the "kit" 18 - 55mm will probably do you nicely, although it doesn't have the telephoto reach of the 18 - 200mm. The 18-55 should be avoided like the plague. The 18-55 IS costs little more and is distinctly superior (although obviously not in L series territory). Agreed. Had you checked the link I provided, you would have seen it was the 18-55mm IS lens to which I referred, not the older version. The photo clearly shows the words "IMAGE STABILIZER" in large letters! Cheers, David |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
"David J Taylor"
wrote in message om DRS wrote: [...] The 18-55 should be avoided like the plague. The 18-55 IS costs little more and is distinctly superior (although obviously not in L series territory). Agreed. Had you checked the link I provided, you would have seen it was the 18-55mm IS lens to which I referred, not the older version. The photo clearly shows the words "IMAGE STABILIZER" in large letters! I didn't check the link. I relied on your reference to 'the "kit" 18 - 55mm'. The problem for uninformed consumers is that both are still available (why Canon persist with the 18-55 is beyond me when the 18-55 IS is only a little more expensive), and it is easy to confuse the two. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Please indulge me .......
DRS wrote:
[] I didn't check the link. I relied on your reference to 'the "kit" 18 - 55mm'. The problem for uninformed consumers is that both are still available (why Canon persist with the 18-55 is beyond me when the 18-55 IS is only a little more expensive), and it is easy to confuse the two. Yes, I now realise it was ambiguous, and for that I apologise. Agreed on Canon, but of course some people maintain "I don't need IS, and won't pay the extra for it". A poor decision in this particular case, as the 18-55 IS is so much better. Cheers, David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|