Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 28, 2006, 10:29 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Hello there,

Has anyone ever tried using a .42x or any wide-angle add-on lens on top of a 50mm prime lens? I'm in the market for a new slr and I think I will get the EOS350D, but I'm debating the kit lens at this point.

I know that I will get the 50mm 1.8, but should I spend the extra $90 on the kitlens or try and find a good wide-angle add on lens.

I know there are a lot of bad add-on lenses out there, but I already have a Tiffen 2x add-on that performs very well on my current PnS camera (Canon A610). So maybe there is a decent wide angle add-on lens that, along with the 50mm prime, would outperform the kit lens.

Bottom line is that if its better than the kit lens, I'd rather keep the prime on the camera full time (dust issues) and only use the add-on lenses in a pinch. Too bad Tiffen only makes a .75x lens and not a .5x or less as their tele -2X is very high quality IMO.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
ohcello is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 5, 2007, 3:37 PM   #2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 29
Default

Howdy!

I'm Jerry, I would suggest that you get the kit lens as a good starter lens for you to use. First, What type of photos will you be taking? Where and what do you most often photograph? I would suggest if you can afford it to buy the best quality lenses you can. A few suggestions are:

Canon 16-35 f 2.8

Canon 17-40 F 4.0 ( I use this lens)

Also:

Canon 24-70 F 2.8

Canon 70-200 f 2.8

Most photographers use the 24-70 and 70-200 combination lenses with two digital bodies. I would suggest you check out www.keh.com they have excellent deals and I have found they are consistently lower priced on their lenses, cameras etc then www.bhphoto.com or www.adorama.com

Lenses will be the best investment you make, not your camera. If you have any questions please feel free to post here or e-mail me and I will help you as much as I can.



Best,

Jerry
TXPhoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2007, 5:06 PM   #3
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

I would not mess around with wide converters even if you could find one to fit the thread, as Jerry says get a good zoom as a walk around lens. What lens is best will depend on the type of photography you want to do however most people would want 17 or 18mm at the wide end otherwise with the 1.6x crop you are getting something that is no good for landscape (generally) or architecture. A 24mm lens would be 38.4mm in 35mm terms which is quite long.

There are some good options and when we know what you are wanting to shoot them I'm sure people can give some good suggestions.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2007, 8:06 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Hello,

Thanks for the information. Yes, I know a great deal about all these lenses and I'll probably end up getting a zoom to do with my prime, but I'm just asking to see if anyone has tried the add-on lenses (Wide angle).

Thanks
ohcello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2007, 5:24 AM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 48
Default

Don't make your life complicated, use DSLR the way it is supposed to - buy more lenses, since you've entered into this story.

The best bang for buck is Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 DC Macro. It's more than wide enough at 17mm, exceptional optical performance in most of situations, and actually quite usable Macro - focuses just above the front glass.

You could also consider Sigma 18-125, but I prefer better optical quality above zoom range, which you get with the lens above.

I can see that you're on budget, so I don't recommend twice as expensive Canon 17-40L f4, or 50% expensive Sigma 18-50 EX f2.8, or Tamron 18-50 f2.8, or Canon 17-55 IS USM f2.8 (4 times expensive).

Go for 17-70, exceptional affordable lens.
nidza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2007, 1:28 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Hi there,

I agree about the Sigma 17-70mm lens, but the cheapest I can find it is $360 shipped, where as the Sigma 18-50 is $395, and the tamron 17-50mm is $412... am I missing something?
ohcello is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2007, 11:19 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
pagerboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 483
Default

I wouldn't bother with the kit lens, not sharp enough.
pagerboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 6:29 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
wrams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 490
Default

Iv'e got a 17-70 and its a outstanding peice of kit....You can use this as a general walk around lens too....Fast auto focus and sharp images....
wrams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2007, 7:38 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

Yeah, the 17-70 is way up there on my list along with the Tamron 17-50.... I wonder is the bokeh on teh 17-70 takes a 'hit' because it is not a full-time, f2.8 lens like the Tamron? Anyone?

Also, how is the Sigma 17-70 in low light at 35mm, or 50mm??

Thanks
ohcello is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:44 PM.