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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 16, 2003, 8:05 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 274
Default Help with Wide Angle lens for 300D ??

I am considering purchasing the EOS-300D D-SLR. Is the included lens with the kit (EF-S 15-55mm) worth it or should I invest in a Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM lens. I plan to use this lens mostly for indoor pics of family members, kids, parties, indoor sports and concert events (at my kids' school) with the occasional low-light situation.
agiaccio is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 16, 2003, 9:36 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I can't say anything about the kit lens. Sorry. What is the lowest fstop it supports?

I can say that the Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM is a very good lens. Many rate it as better than the 16-35 f2.8L (and much cheaper than it too.) In fact, I have a 17-40 on order and will pick it up tomorrow. I need wider angle as well.

You might want a lower fstop if you will use it indoors a lot. Of course, you could also get a flash an the 17-30 for the price of the faster f2.8.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 9:40 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

It's a no brainer here... One is a give away, the other is of course better and obviously you'll pay more for it and have to carry it around (ie almost the weight and the price of another 300D)!

I believe everyone should get the lens kit... which is a very nice and compact package (and all other lenses are optional!).
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 10:25 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Tomsch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 442
Default Lens kit

I keep wondering why everyone has a hangup about this lens.all you need do is go to steve's review and look at the photo of the volley ball match. I took the time to download it and found it quite remarkable. There is a plane overhead towing a banner and you can make out the tele number. I think that this lens would serve a vast majority of shooting needs. When I purchased my camera I got the canon 50mm 1.8 and at first glance and feel I found it laughable, after some months of use I have come to see it's value. There are a number of lenses on my dream list but I'll always own a plastic 50 1.8 . I think the kit 18-55 will always be an asset to new rebel owners. If your taste is too exacting then by all means save the hundred dollars, you'll need it to buy a hood and filter for your canon lens that doubled the cost of youe camera bag!
Tomsch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 2:30 PM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Just like I said this is a no brainer with even more coverage (ie 24-88mm effectively) than the 17-40 in a more compact and practical package and only for $100...

It's just too bad you can't buy or fit it to a 10D! :lol: :lol: :lol:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 3:39 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

The next person asking this question owes us $100 :-) :-) :-)

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 16, 2003, 4:25 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Good to hear that the kit lens is fairly good (especially for $100.) I really haven't paid much attention to it.

But do they own the first person to answer, or do we all get $100?

Tomsch

I agree on the 50 f1.8. It's a deal at $60. Small, light, fast, good in low light. Wish the manual focus ring was better... but then again, I've never used it! AF has been just fine.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2003, 4:36 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eric s
I can say that the Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM is a very good lens. Many rate it as better than the 16-35 f2.8L (and much cheaper than it too.) In fact, I have a 17-40 on order and will pick it up tomorrow. I need wider angle as well.
Eric
Eric, did you get your 17-40L? How do you like it? Don't forget to put a UV filter on it, to completely seal it off.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2003, 4:52 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

The 17-40L is sitting behind me on the floor in a box (can you tell I don't have kids?)

I got a Polarizer (expensive things, but we knew that!) but no UV. I thought about it, but didn't get one. I'll have to think about that. Should I get one and put it on the polarizer? Doesn’t that risk more flare?

I will be going out tomorrow (if the weather holds. It should be ok early and clouding up as the day goes on.) One word describes Sunday. Rain.

Let me mount it on my camera and see the difference 17mm vs. 28mm gives you. Here we go… not too heavy. Oops, flipped the mf/af switch. Helps if you take off the lens cap. Ah, yea. That makes a big difference. Quick guess is about 30’ish degrees.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 17, 2003, 5:27 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

I always have a UV haze filter on all my lenses, and screw the polarizer on that. Haven't noticed a problem with that.

What polarizer did you get? I might just get the same one you did, since you probably did a good amount of research on it :-)

Barthold
barthold 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 10:27 PM.