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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 14, 2005, 7:12 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Default

Newbie here who just got the dreb 300d with the kit lens. I am heading to Vegas next month with my wife and 4 others. I am looking to buy a good lens for the trip. Pics will mainly be of the surroundings of Vegas, the desert, and of course group photos.

Let's set a budget of under $400

When I return home....if I do LOL...most of my pics will be of the kids and some soccer games.

Any and all suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Tks
MupMup
mupmup is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 15, 2005, 8:21 AM   #2
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I really think the kit lense will serve you well in Vegas. But since you mention shooting in surrounding areas I would suggest a circular polarizer if you don't already have one. That will improve your landscape shots immensely. I would take the remaining money and save up for another lense that you can use beyond Vegas.

Another suggestion is to take a good tripod (use the money for that rather than a lense). I've seen some great shots of Vegas at night - and to do that you really need a tripod. I think those two items will serve you much better in the long run for your money than a $400 lense
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 8:49 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Default

Thanks for the reply. I will take your advice. My future plans are for the

EF 70-2000mm L f4. I have read alot of good things about it......$500+ used all over ebay.



Any other input by other members would be greatly appreciated.



Tks
mupmup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 9:54 AM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

mupmup wrote:
Quote:
EF 70-2000mm L f4. I have read alot of good things about it......$500+ used all over ebay.

Any other input by other members would be greatly appreciated.
Ever wonder why... :idea:

The lens is definitely not bad (it's an 'L'), but why would so many Ebay something that is that good???
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 10:37 AM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Default

Seems that most are upgrading to the f2.8 IS.

I have found nothing but good reviews on the web for f4 L
mupmup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 1:47 PM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

mupmup wrote:
Quote:
Seems that most are upgrading to the f2.8 IS.
Exactly - why not go straight for the f/2.8's !
... not too many on Ebay hey??? :-)
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 2:37 PM   #7
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I'm going to take a wild guess and say NHL is leading you down the following path:

Sigma 70-200 2.8 is about $150 more than the Canon 4.0. It is also $400 less than Canon 2.8 (non-IS).

SOOOOOO...

For just a little more than the price of a 4.0 lense - you can get a very high quality 2.8 lense in the first price (and if you use tripod or monopod the Sigma 2.8 comes with a collar - the Canon 4.0 does not - it's about $110 additional) - so that price difference is shrinking.

Just a hunch

By the way that's the logic I bought into from several people when buying my Sigma 70-200 2.8 :-)
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 3:31 PM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

JohnG

My point exactly!

Folks tend to forget that the f/2.8 is not just for low-light it can create beautiful portrait in full sun by separating the subject from it's background with the shallower DOF

This is what I don't understand - Photography is all about mastering lighting (either controlling or creating it) and everyone 'want' IS so they can shoot in the dark - What am I missing??? :?
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 15, 2005, 4:28 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
VictorEM83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 156
Default

I went without IS for my 70-200 F2.8L and have very few problems with low light shots IS only helps for longer exposures hand held but if your shooting a moving subject IS is useless or will make it worse becuase you will try to use a slower shutter speed that you should even try with to get more light IMHO. I would save the $500 from buying a non IS over an IS lens for a Metz 70MZ-5 :| that will solve most lighting problems :G
VictorEM83 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 8:47 AM.